Archived: The White House

Updated 12 June 2015

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.

The inspection was unannounced on 7 April 2015 and then announced on 21 and 22 April 2015. We announced the inspection because the location was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector. We met and spoke with the three people who lived at the home. We also spoke with the training & recruitment manager and three staff. The registered manager was not available during the inspection. We spoke with one relative during the inspection and received email feedback from another relative.

We looked at two people’s care and support plans and records, two people’s medication administration records and documents about how the service was managed. These included staffing records, audits, meeting minutes, maintenance records and quality assurance records.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service; this included incidents they had notified us about. Following the inspection contacted the community learning disability and intensive support teams and GPs to obtain their views.

We asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) before our inspection. They returned this as requested. This is a form that asks the provider to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they planned to make.

Updated 12 June 2015

The inspection was unannounced on 7 April 2015 and then announced on 21 and 22 April 2015. We announced the inspection because the location was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The White House is a care home for people with autism and learning disabilities. The home is registered to provide personal care for seven people. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the home.

The registered manager has been in post since November 2013. They were previously the training and recruitment manager and had worked at the home since it opened in 2002. 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.

Some of the people had complex needs and were not able to tell us their experiences. We saw that those people and the people we spoke with were smiling, happy and relaxed in the home.

One person and relatives told us they felt people were safe at the home. Staff knew how to recognise any signs of abuse.

Medicines were managed safely and stored securely. People received their medicines as prescribed by their GP.

The provider had a range of systems in place to protect people from risks to their safety. These included premises and maintenance checks, regular servicing and checks for equipment and risk assessments for each person living in the home.

Decisions made in people’s best interests were recorded as they should have been to ensure that people’s rights to make decisions about their care were respected.

Staff understood their responsibilities in regard to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The DoLS are part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They aim to make sure that people in care homes are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom. The safeguards should ensure that a care home only deprives someone of their liberty in a safe and correct way, and that this is only done when it is in the best interests of the person and there is no other way to look after them. DoLS applications were correctly completed and submitted to the local authority.

People received care and support in a personalised way. Staff knew people well and understood their needs. People received the health, personal and social care and support they needed.

Staff were caring and treated people with dignity and respect. People had access to the local community and had individual activities provided.

There was a stable staff team and agency staff were not used. Staff received an induction, core training and specialist training so they had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.

One person, staff, and relatives commented on the family atmosphere at the home. There was a clear management structure and staff, relatives and people felt comfortable talking to the managers about any concerns and ideas for improvements. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. The managers were going to use these systems to develop and drive improvements.

We last inspected The White House in January 2014 and did not identify any shortfalls.