• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: The White House

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

15 Woodway Road, Teignmouth, Devon, TQ14 8QB (01626) 774322

Provided and run by:
Langton Care Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

19 April 2017

During a routine inspection

The White House is a large detached house set on the outskirts of the coastal town of Teignmouth. The home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 22 older people who may be living with a dementia or physical disability.

At the time of the inspection there were 22 people living at the home. The home offers both long stay and short stay respite care. The White House does not provide nursing care. Where needed this is provided by the community nursing team.

This inspection took place on the 19 and 20 April 2017; the first day of the inspection was unannounced. The home was previously inspected in February 2015 when it was found to be meeting the requirements at the time.

The home had a registered manager. However, they were not available during this inspection as they were on annual leave. 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.

There was some good practice in relation to the management of medicines. However, we found improvements were needed in relation to record keeping, storage and the deposal of unused prescribed topical applications, such as creams, ointments, and gels when they were no longer required. For example, in the main lounge we found an unlocked wooden cabinet that contained a number of prescribed topical applications dating back to 2013 and 2014, which should have been return to the local pharmacy for disposal. Immediate action was taken to address these issues. People received their prescribed medicines when they needed them and in a safe way. Staff had received training in the safe administration of medicines.

People were not always protected from the risk of harm. We found a number of toiletries and chemicals had been left out and accessible. Risk assessments had not been completed to show this was safe, despite these potentially presenting a risk to people living with dementia who might ingest them accidentally. Immediate action was taken to address these issues. Other risks to people's health, safety, and well-being had been assessed and regularly reviewed. People’s care plans contained detailed risk assessments and management plans, which covered a range of issues in relation to people's needs. For example, risks associated with skin care, poor nutrition and the risk of falls due to reduced mobility had all been assessed.

Staff displayed a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS). People were encouraged to make choices and were involved in the care and support they received. Some people did not have the mental capacity to make complex decisions about their health and welfare. Where decisions had been made in a person’s best interests these were not always being fully documented. We raised this and were assured action would be taken to address this.

The home’s quality assurance and governance systems were not effective. Although some systems were working well others had not identified the concerns we found during this inspection.

People said they felt safe and well cared for at The White House, their comments included “I feel safe here they [staff] look after me well.” Another person said, “I do feel safe, it’s my home.” Relatives told us they did not have any concerns about people's safety. People were protected from abuse and harm. Staff received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and demonstrated a good understanding of how to keep people safe. There was a comprehensive staff-training programme in place. This included first aid, pressure area care, infection control, moving and handling, and food hygiene.

People told us staff treated them with respect and maintained their dignity. Throughout the inspection, there was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere within the home. Staff spoke about people with kindness and compassion. People and relatives told us they were involved in identifying their needs and developing the care provided. People's care plans were informative, detailed, and designed to help ensure people received personalised care.

People spoke positively about activities at the home and told us they had the opportunity to join in if they wanted. The home had a programme of organised activities that included arts and crafts, music sessions, exercise classes, card games, and quizzes.

People, relatives and staff spoke highly of the management team and told us the home was well managed. Staff described a culture of openness and transparency where people, relatives and staff, were able to provide feedback, raise concerns, and were confident they would be taken seriously.

We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

24 and 25 February 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 24 and 25 February 2015 and was unannounced.

The White House provides care and accommodation for up to 22 people. On the day of the inspection 22 people were using the service. The White House provides care for older people who may live with mental health conditions which includes people living with dementia.

The service had 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 and staff were relaxed throughout our inspection. There was a calm and pleasant atmosphere. People were often seen laughing and joking and told us they enjoyed living in the home. Comments included; “We always have a joke with staff, absolutely looked after well, we often have such a laugh.” and “I’m in the best place I could be. I’m happy and I’m comfortable.” A relative said, “I couldn’t wish for a better place for my Mum to live. I just love the place.” A district nurse stated, “I can’t say anything negative about the home, I would live there myself.”

People spoke highly about the care and support they received, one person said, “I’m very, very happy here, the staff are kind and caring.” Another stated: “I feel very well supported, I’m well looked after.” Care records were personalised and gave people control over all aspects of their lives. Staff responded quickly to people’s change in needs. People or where appropriate those who matter to them, were involved in regularly reviewing their needs and how they would like to be supported. People’s preferences were identified and respected. A relative commented, “Staff talk to people they care for, and ask them what they can do for them.”

People’s risks were managed well and monitored. People were promoted to live full and active lives and were supported to be as independent as possible. Activities were meaningful and reflected people’s interest and individual hobbies. A relative said “Staff are very good at promoting independence.”

People had their medicines managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed, received them on time and understood what they were for. People were supported to maintain good health through regular access to healthcare professionals, such as GP’s, social workers, occupational therapists and district nurses. A GP commented that staff knew people well and were always able to provide a brief an accurate synopsis of their concern and act promptly.

People told us they felt safe. Comments included, “I feel safe” and “I’m very safe here, always plenty of staff around.” People’s safety and liberty was promoted. All staff had undertaken training on safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse, they displayed good knowledge on how to report any concerns and described what action they would take to protect people against harm. Staff told us they felt confident any incidents or allegations would be fully investigated.

People were protected by the service’s safe recruitment practices. Staff underwent the necessary checks which determined they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults, before they started their employment.

People and those who mattered to them knew how to raise concerns and make complaints. People told us concerns raised had been dealt with promptly and satisfactorily. Any complaints made were thoroughly investigated and recorded in line with The White House’s own policy. A relative commented, “I made a complaint, it was listened to and dealt with immediately, you can’t ask for more than that.”

Staff described the management to be supportive and approachable. Staff talked positively about their jobs. Comments included: “I just love working here, definitely well supported.”; “Management are approachable and supportive, they put people first and give us everything we need to make a difference in people’s lives. I go home happy every day.” And “I enjoy my job, I’m happy, happy, happy.”

Staff received a comprehensive induction programme. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. Staff were appropriately trained and had the correct skills to carry out their roles effectively. A staff member said: “You can’t fault the training it is unbelievable; we have a fantastic team of people, with the right mix of skills and experience.”

There were effective quality assurance systems in place. Incidents were appropriately recorded and analysed. Learning from incidents and concerns raised was used to help drive improvements and ensure positive progress was made in the delivery of care and support provided by the service.

29 January 2014

During a routine inspection

During this inspection there were twenty people living at the home we met and spoke with five of them. We also spoke with two relatives visiting, five staff and the registered manager.

We observed the care staffs morning handover and breakfast at the home,

The home appeared clean and smelt fresh. The bedrooms were individually decorated to people's own taste and personalised with their own belongings.

We spoke with staff about their training and support. All the staff said they enjoyed working at the home and felt well supported by their manager. They told us they were encouraged to do 'lots of training' We found that staff received training and support which enabled them to meet the needs of the people who lived there.

We spent time looking at key documents including care plans, daily records and maintenance records.

Relatives told us they were very pleased with the home and the care provided there.

People told us they felt safe comfortable and well cared for.

21 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We (the CQC) spoke with five people, one visitor, the registered manager, deputy manager and three carers. We also spent time observing care and lunch time and looked at three care plans. During our inspection 20 people were living at the home and receiving care from the service.

Staff told us that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the staff acted in accordance with their wishes. However, this was not always recorded in people's records.

Staff showed consideration and respect in the way they responded to the needs of those with dementia. There were enough staff to meet people's needs and staff were well supported. We looked at the arrangements in place to recruit staff and saw that the service had effective recruitment and selection procedures in place.

People that we spoke with made positive comments about the way they were looked after. Comments made by people included "I'm very happy living at the White House" and "I've been here a couple of months and we're very well looked after".

We found the home to be clean and tidy throughout. People told us that if they wanted to make comments, raise concerns or complaints they were confident that they would be listened to and appropriate action would be taken where possible.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

16 November 2011

During a routine inspection

People we spoke to during this visit told us the staff were friendly, considerate and

treated them kindly. Everyone we spoke to said they felt safe living at The White

House.People we spoke to said the staff at the home were 'Lovely, really caring' people who supported them well. Another person said 'They are all good and work very hard. They look after me very well'. We spoke to five people at length and all confirmed that staff are 'always very busy'. Two people said that it often takes some time before a member of staff comes when they ring for assistance and when they do attend they have to 'rush off again'. Another person said 'it's like being in a desert, don't see or hear anyone, simply because staff are busy' this person did add that they could call for staff to come when they needed assistance.

We were told that the home is 'always fresh and clean' and that 'my room is kept nice for me'.

They told us they were not aware of the records the home kept, but we saw information in some of the files that showed us that people are involved in assessments and reviews.

People told us the meals were good home cooked food. After a meal one person told us 'I have had plenty of everything and I have enjoyed it'.