Archived: Wisteria Lodge Care Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary details what we observed, what we reviewed in the provider's records, and what people using the service, their relatives, and the staff told us about the service.

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

Is the service safe?

The care plans we reviewed for people living at the home included risk assessments which identified risks and recommended actions to minimise those risks. This demonstrated that there were systems in place to measure and control risks to people using the service.

Recruitment practice was safe and thorough. This meant that people were cared for by competent and experienced staff.

We found that the provider did not have a contingency plan in place should the people using the service need to be relocated to another premises, for example following flooding or fire damage. The manager told us this would be dealt with as a priority.

We reviewed the equipment being used to provide the service. There were appropriate service agreements in place for the stair-lift and call-bell system and they were working correctly. The bath chair was also working correctly.

All the walking aids being used by people were in good condition. However, we found defects on three wheelchairs which were privately owned by people living at the home. These defects presented a safety risk. The provider did not regularly audit wheelchairs and walking aids being used in the home. The manager agreed to immediately introduce a regular audit of all mobility and walking aids and to ensure arrangements were made for the wheelchair defects to be repaired.

None of the people living at the home were subject to deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) at the time of our visit. Staff had a good understanding of their duties in relation to safeguarding and whistleblowing which meant people were protected.

Is the service effective?

All the people and relatives we spoke with during our visit were complimentary about the care provided by the staff. One person described the staff as "very helpful" and a relative told us the staff consistently did "more than you would expect".

People were involved in the assessment of their care needs and development of their care plans. This ensured care plans reflected their individual needs.

The provider had established links with other health and social care professionals. This meant people were supported to access additional care and treatment services to meet their needs.

Is the service caring?

The care staff had completed relevant training in maintaining people's privacy, dignity, and independence. We saw evidence of staff interacting with people and treating them with consideration and respect.

One relative told us they "couldn't speak highly enough" of the care staff and that all the staff "had the same high standards". One person living at the home told us the staff provided care in a "dignified and respectful way".

People's preferences, interests, and care needs had been identified in their care plans and support was provided in accordance with their wishes.

Is the service responsive?

The provider had appropriate systems in place to ensure the service was meeting the needs of the people living at the home. The staff had a good understanding of people's preferences which meant care and support was tailored to their individual needs.

There were effective systems in place to ensure changes to people's care plans were communicated to the care staff. This meant that the delivery of care could be adapted to people's changing needs.

There was evidence that the provider recorded accidents and incidents and that measures would be put in place to minimise the risk of future incidents.

There was a complaints procedure in place and the people we spoke with and their relatives were aware of how to make a complaint if required. All the people we spoke with during our visit said they had never had any reason to make a complaint about the service.

Is the service well-led?

The provider had quality assurance processes in place to ensure the service was meeting the needs and expectations of the people living at the home and their relatives.

All the people we spoke with during our visit, including care staff and relatives, agreed that they would be supported by the manager and provider if they wanted to comment or complain about the service.

All the staff we spoke with were clear on their roles and responsibilities within the home. The staff told us they had been given appropriate training and support by the provider to enable them to carry out their care duties safely and effectively. Because the manager and provider were actively involved in providing care support, they were also able to provide staff with necessary guidance on best practice.

The service had established links with other health and social care professionals to ensure people's care needs were met.

One person who lived in the home told us, "this is a lovely home, everyone is so friendly and it is just like home". Another person we spoke with told us, "I wouldn't go anywhere else, I have a lovely room and the staff are excellent, so accommodating and helpful".

A relative we spoke with told us," the care in this home is excellent, we cannot fault it, the staff are so cheerful , they really lift people's spirits up".

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

We found that care plans accurately reflected people's needs and had been drawn up with their involvement. Care plans we examined were individualised and had appropriate risk assessments in place for relevant areas such as moving and handling and nutrition.

We found people who lived in the home had their medicines at the times they needed them, and were given them in a safe way. Medicines were handled, administered and disposed of appropriately and there were monthly medication audits to ensure procedures had been followed correctly.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff and received care from care workers they knew well.

Records we looked at were accurate, up to date and were easily accessible to us during our visit.