• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: The White House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

4 Walpole Road, Bournemouth, Dorset, BH1 4EZ (01202) 399471

Provided and run by:
Steadway Care Limited

All Inspections

7, 21 and 22 April 2015

During a routine inspection

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.

29, 31 January 2014

During a routine inspection

As part of this inspection we spoke to one person who lived at The White House and two relatives. We also spoke with six members of staff including the manager and observed a staff handover.

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people were unable to give valid consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. The individual we spoke with told us they enjoyed living at the home and a relative said their family member was, 'Happy'.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

The provider had an effective system in place to regularly check and monitor the quality of the service people received.

22 February 2013

During a routine inspection

When we visited there were four people living at the home. People who lived at the home told us that they were happy with the care and support that they received. One relative that we spoke with confirmed this.

People who lived at the home had been assessed as not having capacity to make choices and decisions which affected their lives. Staff were clear how to support people to make everyday decisions and choices. The manager was able to describe choices people made in relation to day-to-day decisions. However, mental capacity assessments and formally recorded best interest decisions were not fully completed at the time of the inspection.

We saw evidence that people had been involved in developing their own care and support plans.

We spoke with one relative and they told us, "People know each other well" and staff knew their family member "very well" as they had been there a long time.

We spoke with the manager and four staff who told us that people were treated with respect and were supported to make choices during meal times and daily activities. We observed people being given choices and staff speaking respectfully.

We saw medicines were kept safely.

We saw that there was a complaints policy including easy read guidance for people using the service.