You are here

Archived: RNIB Wavertree House

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18, 21 July 2014
Date of Publication: 13 August 2014
Inspection Report published 13 August 2014 PDF | 97.71 KB


Inspection carried out on 18, 21 July 2014

During a routine inspection

Our inspection team was made up of one adult social care inspector. We answered our five questions: Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

We spoke with six people who used the service. We also spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager, three care workers, care supervisor, activities coordinator and laundry worker.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people who used the service and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is it safe?

Systems were in place to make sure that all staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. Feedback was sought from people which helped the home develop and learn.

The service was clean and tidy. We found that shortfalls highlighted at the last inspection of the service had been addressed and people were safeguarded from the risk of cross infection.

People spoke positively about the cleanliness of the home. We saw that dedicated housekeepers were employed. The home had a quality assurance framework in place to monitor standards of cleanliness and infection control.

The premises were safe and well maintained. We saw that staff had regularly tested safety equipment such as fire alarms. Floors and carpets were in good condition, which minimised the risk of people tripping.

Call bells allowed for people to summon assistance. People we spoke with commented that their call bell were answered promptly by care workers.

Is it effective?

People had their care needs assessed and staff understood what people's care needs were.

Before someone moved into the home, a pre-admission assessment took place. This allowed for the home to meet with the person and ensure they can safely meet their care needs.

People received appropriate support from healthcare professionals when required. Examples seen, included referrals to other professionals such as GPs, speech and language therapists (SALT) and the district nurses.

Care plans were not always correct and fit for purpose. The home did not consistently review care plans on a monthly basis. This meant that information for not available to care workers to provide the care required. We have asked the service to take action.

Care plans did not always demonstrate that the person was involved in their care plan and agreed with the content. We have asked the service to take action.

Is it caring?

People we spoke with commented that they were treated and privacy and respect. One person told us, �They always knock before they come into my room.�

Care workers we spoke with demonstrated a sound understanding of the principles of privacy and dignity.

The service employed dedicated activity coordinators who organised daily events. We saw that people were encouraged to participate but could also request activities to engage with.

People were wearing hearing aids, glasses and footwear of their choice. We saw that people had their hair neatly done and people were dressed in accordance to their individual preference and lifestyle choice.

Is it responsive?

There was a complaints policy and procedure in place if people or their representatives were unhappy, which was monitored by the provider.

People we spoke with felt confident in approaching members of management with any concerns.

Where people�s health had deteriorated, we saw that the home took appropriate action. We saw that the home worked closely with district nurses, GPs and other healthcare professionals.

Resident and staff meetings were held to explore how positive changes could be made.

Is it Well-led?

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law with the provider.

The home had a quality assurance system, records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continually improving.

Staff had the necessary knowledge, skills and experience to meet the needs of people at all times.