We carried out a review of the data available to us about Wright Homecare Limited 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 Wright Homecare Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Wright Homecare Limited is a residential care home providing personal care for up to four people with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection there were four people receiving a service.
The service is located in a residential area. There is parking at the front of the property and a secure garden area with a seated area to the rear. People have individual bedrooms on the ground and first floor.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were safe living at the home and staff understood how to protect them from harm and abuse. Risks to individuals were assessed, monitored and reviewed, and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. The provider followed safe recruitment practices. People’s medicines were managed safely, and they were protected from any harm associated with them.
Staff received training to have the skills and knowledge to support people and received regular support from the registered manager. People had access to health care to ensure they stayed well and staff continued to support people in hospital where any treatment was needed. People chose what they wanted to eat and drink and this was prepared well.
Staff were respectful and listened to what people had to say and ensured they were involved in making day to day decisions about their care. Where people may lack capacity to make important decisions, best interest decisions were made with those who were important to them. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People had developed caring relationships with staff. Care was provided with kindness and compassion and people’s independence was promoted. Staff ensured that people were supported to maintain their dignity and respected their right to privacy. People stayed in touch with people who were important to them and visitors could come to the home at any time.
People were involved in the planning of their support and received care that was individual to them and participated in activities they enjoyed. Their views were taken into account when improvements were made in the service and staff recognised when people were unhappy.
There were systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of care people received. Actions were taken to make improvements and staff felt supported in their roles. The registered manager and provider showed a clear understanding about their responsibilities as registered persons.
Rating at last inspection:
The last rating for this service was Good (published January 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Wright Homecare Limited on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to four people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection four people were using the service. At our previous inspection in November 2015 we found that where people were not able to make decisions, information was not available to demonstrate how decisions had been made in their best interests. We also identified that people may be subject to restrictions as monitoring equipment was used to keep people safe. On this inspection we saw improvements had been made and where people lacked capacity to make certain decisions; decisions were made in consultation with people who were important to them and made in their best interests. Restrictions had been identified and applications had been made to ensure these were lawful.
The service had two registered managers who worked together to manage the service. 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 were supported to take risks at home and when out and encouraged to be independent and learn new life skills. Risks were assessed and reviewed to keep people safe and protect them from avoidable harm. People were protected from unnecessary harm by staff who knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report concerns in line with local safeguarding adult’s procedures. Staffing was organised flexibly to enable people to be involved with activities and do the things they enjoyed. People had opportunities to be involved with a variety of activities and could choose what to be involved with.
Medicines were managed safely to ensure that people received their medicines as prescribed and to keep well. Staff knew how to support people to eat well and there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet peoples need.
People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff who knew them well. People were given time and explanations to help them make choices. We saw that people’s privacy and dignity was respected. People liked the staff who supported them and had developed good relationships with them. People maintained relationships with their families and friends who were invited to join in activities with them.
People received personalised care and were confident that staff supported them in the way they wanted to be supported. Staff knew people’s likes and dislikes and care records reflected how people wanted to be supported and how care was provided.
People and relatives knew how to make complaints and they felt that the staff and registered manager were approachable. Complaints were managed in line with the provider’s complaints procedure and people were informed of any investigation and actions.
Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and provider. Regular quality checks were completed so that people could comment on the quality of service provision. Where necessary, improvements were made to the service.
The service is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to four people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection four people were using the service. At our previous inspection in October 2013, there were no concerns identified in the areas we looked at.
The service had a registered manager. 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 chose how to spend their time and staff sought people’s consent before they provided care and support. Some people did not have capacity to make certain decisions. It was not clear how some decisions had been made and whether people should make the decision for themselves. We saw some people may have restrictions placed upon them as they were not able to go out alone and may not have the capacity to make a decision about their safety. Applications to ensure these restrictions were lawful had not been made. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report
People were supported to take risks at home and when out and encouraged to do the things they liked to do. Risks were assessed and reviewed to keep people safe and protect them from avoidable harm. People were protected from unnecessary harm by staff who knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report concerns in line with local safeguarding adult’s procedures.
Staffing levels were sufficient and flexible to support people and to provide them with opportunities to pursue their interests. People were involved with a range of activities including going out to social clubs and maintaining relationships with friends and family.
People were supported to take their medicines and systems were in place to ensure that people received their medicines as prescribed and to keep well.
People were supported to eat and drink the food they liked. Staff knew how to support people to eat well and maintain a healthy diet.
People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff who knew them well. People were given time and explanations to help them make choices. Staff knew people’s likes and dislikes and care records reflected how people wanted to be supported and how care was provided.
People who used the service and relatives knew how to make complaints and staff recognised changes in people’s behaviour which may indicate they were not happy. Complaints were managed in line with the provider’s complaints procedure and people were informed of any investigation and actions.
Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and provider. Regular quality checks were completed people could comment on the quality of service provision. Where necessary, improvements were made to the service.
People were able to express that they had choices about how they spent their time and how they had been involved in decisions about their care and support. One person said in the survey, 'I can go to my room when I want. I have options. I chose the colours in my bedroom.' People expressed that they enjoyed their activities, one person said that they were kept occupied. We saw from records we looked at that all four people had been supported to lead active lives at home and in the community.
We found that staff understood people's health and social needs. People's support plans included detailed information about how staff needed to support people. People and their advocates had expressed a high level of satisfaction with the care and support that had been provided.
We found representatives gave positive accounts about all the staff and they told us they were 'very satisfied by the care provided'.
We spoke with 3 people's family members and a representative. They told us, 'The care provided is wonderful, I could not ask for better care'. 'We attend medical and dental appointments for our relative with staff, in this way we continue to be involved in all decision made about our relatives care needs'.
We asked people at the home if they felt safe. Staff interpreted their responses as replying "yes" to the question. We asked four representatives if they thought people were safe at this home. They all told us they had no concerns.
We saw staff engaged well with people using the service. Representatives told us staff were approachable and helpful at all times. We observed staff who were able to carry out their duties.
We observed people in the home they all looked satisfied and contented. We saw people were listened to and were relaxed when they interacted with staff on duty.