You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

We carried out a comprehensive inspection of this service on 22 March 2016 and found the registered provider was not compliant with Regulation 11 (need for consent), Regulation 12 (safe care and treatment) and Regulation 17 (good governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Following this inspection the registered provider sent us an action plan stating they would be compliant with all the required regulations by 11 May 2016.

We undertook this unannounced comprehensive inspection on the 30 March 2017 to check the registered provider had met all the legal requirements. We found they had taken action and were now compliant with these regulations.

The Wedge Residential Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 21 older people. Accommodation is arranged over two floors with lift and stair lift access to the second floor. At the time of our inspection 20 people lived at the home.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. 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 were supported by staff who had a good understanding of how to keep them safe, identify signs of abuse and report these appropriately. Robust processes to check the suitability of staff to work with people were in place. There were sufficient staff available to meet the needs of people and they received appropriate training and support to ensure people were cared for in line with their needs and preferences.

Medicines were administered, stored and ordered in a safe and effective way.

Risks associated with people’s care were identified. Staff had a very good understanding of these risks and how to ensure the safety and welfare of people. Incidents and accidents were clearly documented and investigated. Actions and learning were identified from these and shared with all staff.

People were encouraged and supported to make decisions about their care and welfare. Where people were unable to consent to their care the provider was guided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Where people were legally deprived of their liberty to ensure their safety, appropriate guidance had been followed.

People received nutritious meals in line with their needs and preferences, in an environment which provided a calm and relaxing dining experience for them.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff were caring and considerate as they supported people. People and their relatives met with staff to discuss the planning of their care, any concerns they may have and developments in the service provided at the home.

Care plans in place reflected people’s identified needs and the associated risks.

Staff were caring and compassionate and knew people in the home well. External health and social care professionals spoke highly of the care and support people received at the home.

Effective systems were in place to monitor and evaluate any concerns or complaints received and to ensure learning outcomes or improvements were identified from these. Staff encouraged people and their relatives to share their concerns and experiences with them.

The registered manager was visible in the service and available to provide support and guidance for people, staff and their relatives.

A robust system of audits was in place at the home to ensure the safety and welfare of people and actions from these were completed.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

The service was safe.

Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place and staff had a good understanding of how to keep people safe.

Risk assessments in place supported staff to identify and mitigate the risks associated with people’s care.

Staff had been assessed during recruitment as to their suitability to work with people and there were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs.

Medicines were administered, stored and managed in a safe and effective manner.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported effectively to make decisions about the care and support they received. Where people could not consent to their care the provider was guided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff had received training to enable them to meet the needs of people. They knew people well and could demonstrate how to meet people’s individual needs.

People enjoyed a good dining experience at mealtimes and were provided with nutritious meals in line with their needs and preferences.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

The service was caring.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff were caring and considerate as they supported people. People were valued and respected as individuals and were happy and content in the home.

Arrangements were in place to ensure people were involved in planning their care and their views were listened too

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

The service was responsive.

Care plans reflected the identified needs of people and the risks associated with these needs.

A range of activities were in place to provide stimulation for people. People were encouraged to remain independent.

Systems were in place to allow people to express any concerns they may have and complaints were recorded and responded to in a timely way.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

The service was well led.

The registered manager provided strong and effective leadership whilst encouraging staff to develop in the service.

A new system of computerised care record keeping was embedded in the home.

Robust audits and systems were in place to ensure the safety and welfare of people in the home. These audits had identified areas of improvement within the service which were then addressed.