• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Waterbeach

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Fresh Fields, Primrose Lane, Waterbeach, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, CB25 9JZ (01223) 441452

Provided and run by:
Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile
Important: The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 16 June 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 19 and 20 April 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before we carried out this inspection we reviewed the information we held about this service including notifications. A notification is information about events that the registered persons are required, by law, to tell us about.

During our inspection we spoke with the manager, one senior care assistant, one care assistant and the quality and risk manager. We looked at the care records for two people. We also looked at records that related to health and safety and quality monitoring. We looked at medication administration records. We observed how the staff supported people in the communal areas. Observations are a way of helping us understand the experience of people living in the home.

Overall inspection

Requires improvement

Updated 16 June 2016

Waterbeach is registered to provide accommodation and non-nursing care for up to 4 people. There were 4 people with a learning disability living in the home at the time of the inspection. The accommodation is a bungalow and all bedrooms are for single use.

This unannounced inspection took place on 19 and 20 April 2016.

At the last comprehensive inspection on 12 and 13 October 2015 this provider was placed into special measures by CQC. A breach of nine legal requirements was found. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to:

• providing care that was appropriate, safe and met people’s needs,

• treating people with dignity and respect,

• ensuring that the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met

• safe management of people’s medicines,

• maintaining the premises,

• assessment and monitoring of the service,

• sufficient numbers of competent staff to meet peoples assessed needs.

During this inspection we found that there was sufficient improvement to take the provider out of special measures. We found that the provider had followed their plan which they had told us would be completed by 31 March 2016 to show how the legal requirements were to be met. Some improvements were still needed.

There was a registered manager at the time of the inspection. However they were no longer working in the home. A new manager had recently been appointed. 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.

Improvements had been made to ensure that only competent staff administered medicines. Weekly and monthly medicines audits were being carried out and had highlighted any issues and appropriate action had been taken where necessary. Improvements were still needed to ensure that there was a clear record of the medicines in stock.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. The provider was acting in accordance with the requirements of the MCA including the DoLS. The provider was able to demonstrate how they supported people to make decisions about their care. Where people were unable to do so, there were records showing that decisions were being taken in their best interests. DoLS applications had been submitted to the appropriate authority. This meant that people did not have restrictions placed on them without the correct procedures being followed.

People’s care plans had been updated to include information that staff required to meet people’s needs. We found that some information was still not accurate. However we found that staff could tell us how they met people’s needs. All of the care plans were being transferred to a new format which should make them easier to use and contain up to date accurate information..

Risks to people had been assessed. The majority of the risk assessments identified how staff should reduce the possibility of risks to people. Some risk assessments needed further information adding to them to ensure that staff had all the information they required to ensure that risks to people were identified and minimised where possible. Accidents were being were being reviewed to prevent a reoccurrence.

There was a robust recruitment procedure to ensure that only the right people were employed. There was a sufficient number of suitably skilled and competent staff working each day. Staff had completed training courses and competency assessments since the previous inspection to ensure that they could meet people’s needs. Staff were aware of the procedures to follow to reduce the risks of people being harmed by others. Staff told us that they felt supported by the new manager. Staff told us how they promoted people’s dignity, respect and independence.

Food and drink that people had chosen was provided. When needed the relevant healthcare professionals had been involved and their advice was being followed to ensure that people received the support they needed with eating and drinking.

The cupboards and worktops in the kitchen had been renewed to ensure that the premises were maintained appropriately.

The manager had carried out regular audits to assess what improvements needed to be made. Action plans had been put in place as needed. The provider had carried out visits to the home to ensure that the action plans for improvements were being met.