We carried out a review of the data available to us about Wilton House 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 Wilton House, you can give feedback on this service.
At the time of inspection, only 1 person was receiving personal care. Not everyone living at Wilton House received a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the 'Registering the Right Support' and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
At the last inspection in February 2016 this service was rated good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
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.
People continued to receive care that was safe. We saw that staff had been appropriately recruited in to the service and security checks had taken place. There were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs. People were consistently protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.
The care that people received continued to be effective. Staff had access to the support, supervision, training and on-going professional development that they required to work effectively in their roles. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.
People told us their relationships with staff were positive and caring. We saw that staff treated people with respect, kindness and courtesy. People had detailed personalised plans of care in place to enable staff to provide consistent care and support in line with people’s personal preferences.
People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and were confident that if they did, the management would respond to them appropriately. The provider had implemented effective systems to manage any complaints that they may receive.
The service had a positive ethos and an open and honest culture. The registered manager was present and visible within the home.
Wilton House provides care and support for up to six people who have mental health needs, learning difficulties, autistic spectrum disorder, and other associated complex needs. On the day of our inspection there were five people living in the service.
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.
People felt safe in the service and were safeguarded from the risk of abuse. There were clear lines of reporting safeguarding concerns to appropriate agencies and staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding adults. We found that there were processes in place to manage identifiable risks within and outside the service to ensure people did not have their freedom restricted unnecessarily.
There were sufficient numbers of suitably skilled staff, during both the day and night, to meet people’s needs and promote their safety. Robust recruitment processes had been followed to ensure that staff were suitable to work with people. Systems were in place to ensure people’s medicines were managed safely.
Staff were provided with induction and training to keep their skills up to date and to support them to deliver appropriate care to people. Staff were supported with supervision and appraisal, which gave them the opportunity to discuss training and development needs, alongside any other concerns.
The registered manager and staff were aware of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). There were procedures in place to assess people’s ability to make decisions about their care. Staff understood how to make best interest decisions when people were unable to make decisions about their care.
People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. Staff worked in conjunction with healthcare professionals to ensure people’s health and well- being was maintained.
Positive relationships had been developed between people and staff who treated them with kindness and compassion. Staff were knowledgeable about how to meet people’s needs and understood how people preferred to be supported on a daily basis. Staff understood how to promote and protect people’s rights and maintain their privacy and dignity. Relationships with family members were considered important and staff supported people to maintain these.
People received person-centred care, based on their likes, dislikes and individual preferences. Before people came to live at the service their needs had been assessed to ensure the care provided would be personalised and responsive to their identified needs. People were supported to undertake a range of social activities and pastimes in accordance with their preferences.
People knew how to raise a complaint should they need to and had accessible information on how to do this. People were asked for their feedback about the service and improvements were made in accordance with this feedback so as to drive improvement.
Leadership at the service was visible and as a result staff were inspired to provide a quality service. Senior staff regularly assessed and monitored the quality of care provided to people. Staff were encouraged to contribute to the development of the service and understood the provider’s visions and values.
We spoke with two people who lived at the home and two members of staff and the manager. We also reviewed the care records of two people who used the service.
People we spoke with told us that sometimes their behaviours were challenging and they did not get on well with each another. They told us that the staff supported them to manage their behaviours and helped them improve their relationships with other people. They also told us when they made a complaint about the service or about other people living at the home to the staff, they said their concerns were listened to and investigated.
During the inspection visit, we saw that the provider was re-decorating the home. People told us that they were looking forward to having their bedroom walls painted. They also told us that the provider had been using bank staff to cover some staff shortages. However they found this unsettled them because bank staff did not always understand their needs fully. We found that there were adequate numbers of staff working at the home, however the provider might like to note that the increase in bank staff on duty. This meant that staff might not always be able to provide the right level of support for people because they did not routinely work at the service.
We found that people had given their consent for the care and support they received. We also found that the provider had adequate systems in place to protect people's care and welfare and to provide training and support to the staff. We found that people received their medicines in a safe way and had their complaints investigated.
We found 'Wilton House' to be well organised, comfortable, and appropriately maintained.