Estherene House

“This comprehensive assessment was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service, and to check the provider had made improvements and met the requirements of the warning notice. Improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations. The rating for this service has changed from requires improvement to good.”

“The provider had a learning culture. Systems helped reduce risks of abuse and avoidable harm. The environment was clean and well-maintained and risks mitigated, including checks and servicing of equipment used. Staffing levels were kept under review and staff received training relevant to their role. Staff managed medicines safely, however, we identified recording issues for topical medicines, such as creams, immediate action was taken to address this.”

“People’s needs were assessed and they were involved in the planning of their care, as were their relatives, where appropriate. People had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. People’s capacity to make decisions was assessed. Where people lacked capacity, systems supported best interest decision making.”

“Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and respected people’s privacy, independence, choice and dignity. Staff were knowledgeable about people and their individual needs. People’s care plans were person centred and guided staff in how their needs and preferences were to be met. People had access to social activity. People could provide feedback about their care, and their comments were valued and used to drive improvement.”

“The management team were visible, knowledgeable and supportive. Staff wellbeing was promoted and staff worked well as a team. Managers worked with the local community to deliver good quality care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff empowered to try new ideas.”