Archived: Warren Drive

Updated 15 May 2018

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 registered persons continued to meet 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.

We used information the registered persons sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require registered persons to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also examined other information we held about the service. This included notifications of incidents that the registered persons had sent us since our last inspection. These are events that happened in the service that the registered persons are required to tell us about. We also invited feedback from the commissioning bodies who contributed to purchasing some of the care provided in the service. We did this so that they could tell us their views about how well the service was meeting people’s needs and wishes.

We visited the service on 20 March 2018 and the inspection was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of a single inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is someone who has personal experience of using this type of service.

During the inspection visit we spoke with 10 people who lived in the service and with three relatives. We also spoke with four care staff, a senior member of care staff, the administrator, the chef, the maintenance manager, a housekeeper and the laundry manager. The registered manager was not available and in their place we spoke with the deputy manager. We observed care that was provided in communal areas and looked at the care records for four people. We also looked at records that related to how the service was managed including staffing, training and quality assurance.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not speak with us.

After the inspection visit we spoke by telephone with a further three relatives.

Updated 15 May 2018

We inspected the service on 20 March 2018. The inspection was unannounced. Warren Drive is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Warren Drive is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for 29 older people. There were 21people living in the service at the time of our inspection visit.

The service was run by a company who was the registered provider. There was a registered manager 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. In this report when we speak about both the company and the registered manager we refer to them as being, ‘the registered persons’.

At the last comprehensive inspection on 17 October 2016 the overall rating of the service was, ‘Requires Improvement’. We found that there were two breaches of the regulations. This was because there were shortfalls in the arrangements that had been made to provide people with safe care and treatment. We also found that robust arrangements had not been made to ensure that people were fully supported to give their consent to the care they received.

We told the registered persons to take action to make improvements to address both of our concerns. After the inspection the registered persons told us that they had made the necessary improvements.

At the present inspection we found that suitable provision had been made to provide safe care and treatment. This included there being safe arrangements for the management of medicines and for promoting people's health and safety. Also, suitable provision had been made to promote good standards of hygiene in order to prevent and control the risk of people acquiring infections. We also found that people’s consent to their care had been obtained in the right way.

Our other findings were as follows. People had been safeguarded from situations in which they might experience abuse. There were enough care staff on duty and background checks had been completed before new care staff were appointed. Also, lessons had been learned when things had gone wrong.

Suitable arrangements were in place to assess people’s needs and choices so that care was provided to achieve effective outcomes. This included providing people with the reassurance they needed if they became distressed. Care staff knew how to care for people in the right way and had received training and guidance. People were helped to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. Suitable arrangements had been made to help people receive coordinated care when they moved between different services. Also, people had been supported to access any healthcare resources they needed. Furthermore, the accommodation was adapted, designed and decorated to meet people’s needs and expectations.

People were treated with kindness and compassion in a way that respected people’s dignity. People were given emotional support when it was needed. Also, they had been supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care as far as possible. This included them having access to lay advocates if necessary. Confidential information was kept private.

People received responsive care that met their needs for assistance. Also, care staff supported them to have access to written information that was relevant to them. People had been offered sufficient opportunities to pursue their hobbies and interests and to engage in social activities. Furthermore, suitable arrangements had been made to promote equality and diversity. There were suitable arrangements for managing complaints and suitable steps had been made to support people at the end of their life to have a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death.

There was a registered manager who had promoted an open and inclusive culture in the service. Also, there were suitable management arrangements to ensure that regulatory requirements were met. People who lived in the service and members of staff were actively engaged in developing the service. Furthermore, there were systems and procedures to enable the service to learn, improve and assure its sustainability. Also, the registered persons were actively working in partnership with other agencies to support the development of joined-up care.