We carried out a review of the data available to us about Westside Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Westside Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Westside Care Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 30 people. At the time of our inspection there were 22 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People received safe care and treatment. There were systems and processes in place for monitoring and managing risks to people. Some people's risk assessments and care plans lacked sufficiently specific and detailed information for staff in some areas. However, no one had been harmed and staff knew people and their needs well, so people received appropriate and safe care and support. During our inspection the registered manager updated those areas of some people’s risk assessments and care plans that required more specific and detailed information and after our inspection the provider sent us evidence these records had been updated with the required level of information.
People received their medicines safely. Staff received medicines administration training and we saw medicines administration records were completed. The stock count of medicines had not always been recorded and was not always accurate. This potentially made it more difficult for the provider to check whether people always received their medicines. However, no one had been harmed and people had received their medicines as prescribed. After our inspection the provider sent us evidence of new procedures they had put in place to help make their medicines audits more effective.
At the time of our inspection there were still some visiting restrictions in place. We spoke with the provider about this and discussed the current national guidance for visiting people in care homes. As a result, the provider reviewed the visiting restrictions in place and decided they could be removed.
There were systems and processes in place to safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Staff knew how to protect people from abuse and how to report abuse. People told us they felt safe living here and their families said they felt their relatives were safe here.
The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and if needed, appropriate legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty.
There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and staff recruitment followed safer recruitment practice.
Infection prevention and control followed best practice and we were assured the provider was responding effectively to risks and signs of infection and was making sure infection outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed.
Staff knew how to report and record accidents and incidents and there were systems and processes in place to identify learning and share lessons when things went wrong.
Managers and staff were clear about their roles, they understood regulatory requirements and there were quality assurance systems in place. However, not all the audits carried out were always effective. The provider had not identified the issues we found during our inspection. After our inspection the provider sent us evidence of new systems and processes they had put in place to help make their audits more effective.
There was a positive culture that was person-centred, open, inclusive and empowering and the provider engaged and involved people, their relatives and staff in the development of the service.
There were systems and processes in place to support continuous learning and improvement of the service and staff worked effectively in partnership with other professionals, agencies and organisations to meet people’s needs.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 28 October 2017).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
The overall rating for the service has remained good based on the findings of this inspection.
However, we have found evidence the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the well-led section of this report.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Westside Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People told us that staff were friendly and caring and they felt safe in their presence. We saw staff caring for people in a way that promoted their dignity in a respectful manner.
We found there was a homely feel to the service, with relatives visiting throughout the day and being made to feel welcome by all the staff.
People told us they enjoyed the food in the home. They were offered a choice of meals which were appropriate for a balanced diet.
The provider had robust recruitment checks in place and we found there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff received mandatory training when they first joined which was refreshed on an annual basis.
People received their medicines on time from trained staff. They received appropriate care in relation to their health needs and the provider made referrals if people needed additional support, for example from their GP, dietitian and other health professionals.
People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Each person had an individual care plan which reflected their needs. The provider took steps to manage risk to people. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed on a monthly basis which helped to ensure people had the appropriate care and support they needed.
There was an open culture in the home. The management team were approachable and supportive of staff. The provider engaged with people, relatives and staff and sought feedback from them. A number of quality assurance audits took place which helped to ensure good care was provided for people.
We inspected Westside Care Home on 5 February 2015. The inspection was unannounced.
Westside is a home which is registered to provide personal and nursing care for up to 30 elderly people. At the time of our inspection there were 24 people living in the home.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We previously inspected Westside Care in February 2014. We found that it was not meeting all the legal requirements and regulations that we inspected. People were not adequately protected from abuse, the premises were not appropriately maintained to ensure they were safe and we were concerned that staff did not receive regular supervision and appraisal. We asked the provider to take action to make improvements. This action has now been completed.
During our inspection we found the service was meeting all the required standards. People told us they felt safe. Relatives also told us people living in the home were safe. Staff were knowledgeable about how to recognise the signs of abuse and how to report any concerns.
People had risk assessments which gave staff detailed information on how to manage the risks identified. Staff knew how to keep people safe in the event of a medical or other emergency. There was a sufficient number of suitable staff to keep people safe and meet their needs.
There were appropriate arrangements in place for the storage, administering, recording and disposal of medicines. Staff administered medicines safely. All areas of the home were clean and well maintained. Staff controlled the risk and spread of infection by following the service’s infection control policy.
People were satisfied with the quality of care they received. Care plans provided detailed information to staff about how to meet people’s individual needs. People were supported by staff who had the knowledge, skills and experience to deliver their care effectively.
People received a nutritious and balanced diet and had enough to eat and drink throughout the day. Staff worked with a variety of health care professionals to support people to maintain good health.
People living in the home and staff related well with each other. People told us the staff were kind and caring. People were treated with respect and were at the centre of decisions about their care. The provider listened to and learned from people’s experiences, concerns and complaints to improve the service.
Staff had clearly defined roles and understood their responsibilities. People felt able to discuss their care with staff and management. There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of care people received.
People were protected from the risks of poor nutrition and dehydration because staff knew what represented a balanced diet and people's meals were prepared and delivered in accordance with their care plan. People told us they were happy with the quality and quantity of meals they were served. One person told us, "The food is good here and I get enough of it."
We found that people who use the service were not protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had not taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Staff we spoke with lacked essential knowledge regarding safeguarding vulnerable adults.
People who use the service, staff and visitors were not protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises because the provider had not carried out adequate checks in relation to the water and electrical safety.
Staff were not supported by the provider to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard because staff did not receive appropriate training, supervision or appraisal.
There were processes in place to ensure that people who use the service were able to contribute to discussions about how they preferred to be cared for and supported. Where they were unable to participate in this process they were represented by others who make decisions in their best interests.
We saw the satisfaction surveys that had been completed in recently by representatives of people using the service and they were happy with the care being provided in the home.