You are here

Archived: Waterside Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 July 2016

Our inspection was unannounced and took place on 2 and 3 June 2016. Our last inspection of the service took place on 15 August 2014 and the provider was complaint in all areas inspected.

Waterside Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to a maximum of 60 older people. At the time of the inspection there were 59 people living at the home.

The home 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.

Staff understood how to identify and report abuse and had a good understanding of how to manage risks to keep people safe. People were given their medication by staff who had been trained in how to do this.

People told us there were sufficient staff available to meet their needs. Staff had undergone appropriate recruitment checks prior to starting work and had access to ongoing training and supervision to support them in their role.

People had been supported to make their own decisions and had their rights upheld in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Where people had been deprived of their liberty, this was done in line with Mental Capacity Act 2005 and staff were aware of why these safeguards were required.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and had meals that met their dietary requirements. Where people required support to access healthcare services, staff had provided appropriate support to meet people’s health needs.

Staff had a kind and caring approach and treated people with dignity. People were supported to regain independence where possible and had access to advocacy services if required.

People and their relatives were involved in the assessment and review of their care. People were supported by staff that had a good knowledge of people’s needs and people had access to activities that interested them.

People knew how to make complaints and complaints made had been investigated fully by the registered manager. People were supported to provide feedback on the service via resident meetings and suggestions made had been acted upon by the registered manager.

People spoke positively about the leadership at the home. The registered manager completed audits to monitor the quality of the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 July 2016

The service was safe.

People were supported by staff who knew how to identify and report concerns of abuse.

Staff were able to identify and manage risks to keep people safe.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet people�s needs.

People were happy with how their medication was managed.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 July 2016

The service was effective.

Staff had access to ongoing training and supervision to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to support people effectively.

People had their rights upheld in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People had choices at mealtimes and were given meal options that met their dietary requirements.

People had access to healthcare support where this was required.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 July 2016

The service was caring.

Staff had a kind and caring approach and treated people with dignity.

People and their relatives felt involved in their care.

People had access to advocacy services where required.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 July 2016

The service was responsive.

People were involved in the assessment and review of their care.

People had access to activities that reflected their interests.

Complaints made had been investigated fully by the registered manager.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 July 2016

The service was well led.

People spoke positively about the leadership at the home and staff felt supported by the registered manager.

People were given opportunity to provide feedback on their experience of the service.

The registered manager completed audits to monitor the quality of the service.