Edgehill Care Home is a residential care home for five people with mental health needs. At the time of the inspection the home was providing care and support to five people.

At our last inspection of this service on 30 March 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good. The home demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.

The registered provider managed the home. Registered persons have legal responsibility for

meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. There were safeguarding procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures. People using the service and staff told us there was always enough staff on duty to meet people’s care and support needs. Robust recruitment procedures were in place. Action was taken to assess any risks to people using the service. Medicines were managed appropriately and people were receiving their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals.

People’s needs were assessed and care files included detailed information and guidance for staff about how their needs should be met. Staff had the knowledge and skills required to meet people’s needs. The provider had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and acted according to this legislation. People told us they were encouraged to eat healthy meals and cook for themselves. Staff monitored people’s mental and physical health and where there were concerns people were referred to appropriate health professionals.

Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible. People knew about the homes complaints procedure and said they were confident their complaints would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary.

The provider took people’s views into account in relation to the service, through surveys and informal residents meetings. The provider recognised the importance of regularly monitoring the quality of the service they provided to people. Staff said they enjoyed working at the home and they received good support from the provider.

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 14 December 2015 at which a breach of a legal requirement was found. We found that the provider did not have appropriated procedures in place for recruiting staff. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Edgehill Care Home’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We undertook this focused inspection on the 30 March 2016 to check that the provider had complied with this legal requirement. This report only covers our findings in relation to the follow up on the breach of regulations for recruiting staff. We looked at the homes recruitment records and found that appropriate checks had been completed for all of the staff currently working at the home.

We found that the provider had addressed the breach of Regulation 19 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

The inspection took place on the 14 December 2015 and was unannounced. Edge Hill Care Home provides care and support for up to five people with mental health conditions. At the time of this inspection five people were residing at the home. The registered provider managed the home. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At our last inspection on 2 June 2014, we found the provider was meeting the regulations in relation to outcomes we inspected. At this inspection we found the provider did not have appropriated procedures in place for recruiting staff. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

People using the service said they felt safe and that staff treated them well. Staff understood how to safeguard people they supported. There was a whistle-blowing procedure available and staff said they would use it if they needed to. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s care and support needs. Appropriate procedures were in place to support people where risks to their health and welfare had been identified. Medicines were managed safely and people were receiving their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals.

Staff completed an induction when they started work and they were up to date with the provider’s mandatory training. The manager and staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and acted according to this legislation. Peoples care files included assessments relating to their dietary needs and preferences. They were encouraged to buy their own food and cook for themselves. People had access to a GP and other health care professionals when they needed it.

Staff spoke to people in a respectful and dignified manner and people’s privacy was respected. Staff understood that people using the service were individuals with their own beliefs and lifestyles and they encouraged them to be themselves. People had been consulted about their care and support needs. Care plans and risk assessments provided guidance for staff on how to support people with their needs. People knew about the homes complaints procedure and said they were confident their complaints would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary.

The ethos of the home was to improve people’s confidence in their own abilities and help them to move into their own homes. The provider aimed to support people to gain independent living skills and move into their own accommodation. There were appropriate arrangements in place for monitoring the quality of the service that people received. The provider conducted unannounced checks at the home to make sure people where receiving appropriate care and support. Staff said they enjoyed working at the home and had good support from the provider.

We gathered evidence against the outcomes we inspected to help answer our five key questions. Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report.

Is the service safe?

We spoke to two people being supported by the service. They said staff supported them to take their medications and reminded them when they needed to attend health care appointments. This helped keep them safe and well.

Systems were in place to make sure that the provider and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents and complaints and concerns. This reduced the risk to people and helped the service to continually improve.

The provider was available 'on-call' outside of office hours to respond to staff requests for support and to deal with emergencies.

Is the service effective?

People said they had care plans and attended regular review meetings with health care professionals from the Community Mental Health Team (CMHT). We saw that their care plans and risk assessments had been kept under regular review and people were supported to attend medical appointments and meetings with mental health professionals.

Each person using the service had a CPA Contact and Crisis Form. This form included the details of people and organisations involved in the persons support. These people would be contacted in an emergency, for example, where a person using the services mental health condition had deteriorated.

Is the service caring?

One person said: “The staff are not bad we get on well, they help me with my medication and to attend my appointments which helps me.” The other person said “It’s okay here. If I need anything I just ask the staff, they are very helpful.” Both said they had a good relationship with the provider.

We observed positive interactions between staff and people using the service during the course of our visit.

Is the service responsive?

We saw satisfaction questionnaires were completed by people using the service in May 2014. People indicated that they were satisfied with the support they received. The provider told us they used the feedback from the questionnaires to improve the service.

People said if they had to make a complaint or had any concerns about the service they would tell the provider or a member of staff. Both people we spoke with said they were confident that they would be listened to and that something would be done. One person said they had raised concerns with the provider in the past. The provider had looked into their concerns and they were satisfied with the outcome.

Is the service well-led?

We found there were effective systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

People we spoke with told us that they felt supported by the manager and were happy living at the home.

We found that care plans and risk assessments had been updated and there were records of regular keyworker meetings. There were completed records relating to environmental checks and staff files contained appropriate information.

Edge Hill Care Home had four residents at the time of our inspection. We spoke with three of them and they all made positive comments about the home and the staff. One of them said that ‘You get a lot of freedom here’ and explained that he made some of his meals, he went to local shops to buy his lunch and visited his relatives on the weekends. Another person told that the home is ‘Nice and comfortable’ but he was planning to move on to a less supported environment as he felt he would be able to manage on his own.

We saw that people personalised their own rooms and were able to have visitors. We found that people were treated respectfully and saw that staff knew how to communicate with and support them.

We found that information on people’s needs and their care plans were available and were reviewed on a regular basis. The manager monitored the quality of the service through a number of regular checks to ensure that the service met people’s needs.