• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: St Werburghs House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Church Street, Spondon, Derby, Derbyshire, DE21 7LL (01332) 280037

Provided and run by:
Sanctuary Care (Derby) Limited

All Inspections

17 December 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

The inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was unannounced.

St Werburghs House is a nursing home which provides care for up to thirty five people, in twenty nine bedrooms. On the day of our visit there were twenty eight people living there and no-one was sharing a room, some people in the home were living with dementia.

The service has 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the last inspection, which took place in August 2014, all the Regulation requirements were met.

On this inspection we found people were not always protected from unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. Some areas of the home had a malodour.

Staff were trained to recognise and respond to signs of abuse and risk assessments were carried out and reviewed.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the day to day welfare of people and staff were appropriately allocated throughout the home.

Medicines were administered, recorded and managed appropriately.

The staff had appropriate training, supervision and support and they understood their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There was a variety of food choices available on the menus and people could ask for alternatives if they did not like what was available. People were supported to have sufficient food and drink to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported to access other health and social care professionals when required and family members and friends were encouraged to be part of the care arrangements for their relatives when this was appropriate.

Where possible, people were involved in the decisions about their care and their care plans and were encouraged to inform staff how they wanted their care delivered.

Staff were caring, kind and compassionate and cared for people in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity. People felt listened to and had their views and choices respected.

The home was managed in a way that invited people, their relatives and staff to have an input into how the home was run and managed.

The home had systems in place to assess, review and evaluate the quality of service provision, however these processes had failed to recognise the unsafe practices around cleanliness and infection control. The provider and registered manager were working on improved ways of monitoring the cleanliness in the home.

27 August 2014

During a routine inspection

One inspector carried out this inspection. At the time of our inspection 29 people lived in the home. Below is a summary of what we found.

We spent time speaking with people who lived there as well as speaking with staff, relatives and an advocate. We reviewed records and spent time observing people in the home. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report. We used our evidence to answer five questions.

Is the service safe?

People were cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment at the home had been well maintained and serviced regularly. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people who lived in the home. We spoke with people who lived there who said that they felt safe and secure. One person said, "I feel safe sleeping here and living here every day. With medicine, staff and the building itself...all of that makes me feel secure." A family member said, "[My relative] is doing well here, I've never had a problem worrying about safety whilst they've lived here."

Staff records demonstrated that mandatory training was up to date and that staff were trained to meet the complex needs of people who lived there. Staff were trained in caring for people with dementia, complex behaviour, special nutrition requirements and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff had completed the appropriate procedure for one person, which had resulted in a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation being approved by the relevant authority.

Is the service effective?

A relative and an advocate told us that they had been visiting the home for several years and that the consistency in the quality of care had always stood out. A person who lived there said, "Staff always seem to have time for me. We spend hours chatting about old stories and photos, I've never felt that they were just doing a job." We spent time observing staff and people and it was clear that they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and that they knew them well. We also found evidence of this by reading people's records, which included a consistent focus on supporting people's wishes and needs.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard. Staff had received training to meet the needs of people and told us that they were able to put their training into practice.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that nurses and care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. A specialist activities coordinator worked with carers to meet the complex needs of people when planning activities so that they could take part in these safely. We spoke with a person who said, "There's always something going on here but they [staff] don't make you do it. Sometimes I like just sitting in the peace and quiet and they don't push you into anything."

Staff said that they were happy with the level of professional and emotional support they received from the manager. A relative said, "Staff's interpersonal relationships are all really good - with me, with [my relative] and it seems with each other."

Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home and these were checked by regular reviews, in which they were involved. We spoke with the manager who also told us that if people's needs could not be safely met, they were supported to move to another home operated by the provider. People's needs assessments included consideration of their dietary and nutrition requirements as well as their need for social interaction and their preferences about social activities.

We found that care was delivered using individual support plans and regular multi-disciplinary health evaluations, which helped people to be cared for appropriately and in their best interests.

Is the service well led?

Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. Staff told us that they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and that management support helped them to do their job effectively. Staff we spoke with told us that they had a good relationship with the manager and that they felt confident and secure in their role.

8 October 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We visited St Werburgh's House to follow up one area of non compliance from our previous visit. We did not speak with people who used the service during this visit, although we spoke with registered manager and two registered nurses and reviewed the systems in place relating to the recording and administration of medication.

We found the expiry date and stock levels of domestic remedies was checked and recorded on a regular basis. We also found that stock levels of medication were carried forward at the beginning of each 28 day cycle and the amount of medication delivered to the service was checked and recorded. This meant that the total amount of each medication available at the beginning of each 28 day cycle of medication was recorded.

However, we also found that people were not always receiving their medication as prescribed. This was because more medication remained in the boxes than should have been available if the medication had been given as prescribed.

14 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We observed staff delivering care and support to people during our inspection. We saw that people were treated with dignity and respect. The staff team on duty were polite and respectful when offering care and support to people. People told us they were well cared for. People told us 'They look after me well', 'I like it here, the staff are good' and 'The staff are all really nice.' We saw people joining in with and enjoying the activities provided. We also noted staff respected people's wishes not to join in and to remain in their rooms whilst activities were taking place.

We saw the care plans were generally personalised and provided sufficient guidance for staff to deliver care. Care workers had a good knowledge of people's individual needs, and told us communication between shifts was good.

We found the systems in place for the management of medicines were not robust. Staff did not always check the amount of medication received into the service, and people had not received their medication on a number of occasions as it was out of stock.

Care workers told us they felt well supported through supervision, and they were up to date with their training.

We found that the service maintained accurate and appropriate records.

28 November 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us they were satisfied with the care provided. One person told us 'Staff do as good a job as they can.' Another said 'Most of the staff are ok and help if you need it.' We saw staff tended to engage with people who could speak to them, but tended not to acknowledge those people who were less able to communicate. We saw the majority of staff treated people with respect. Some staff did not always tell people what they were doing when they moved them using the hoist, or when they assisted them to eat and drink.

We saw staff used one lounge as a thoroughfare to the main lounge, without considering how this affected the people sat in there. Staff was seen to walk through without acknowledging these people.

People did not raise any concerns about their care. We saw that care plans were generalised and did not provide staff with detailed guidance on how to deliver the care people wanted and needed. Relatives told us they were involved in reviewing the care provided.

Staff knew about the procedures in place to keep people safe. They were less clear on how to care for people who were unable to make decisions about their lives. Relatives told us they thought people were safe. Staff told us about the training opportunities that were provided.

Relatives told us they knew how to raise any concerns and felt confident to do so. We saw systems were in place for recording complaints, and were responded to in line with the complaints procedure.

5, 6 June 2011

During a routine inspection

People living in the home made the following comments about the service there: 'I am very satisfied', 'they give me the help I need here', 'If I want a doctor they ring up for one for me'.

One of the staff told us that any concerns would be reported as 'its important that people here are looked after safely'.

A visitor told us that there are always staff around to talk to. One person sitting in the lounge said, 'They come to me when I want help.' Another said, 'I sometimes wait if they are busy with other people, but usually only a few minutes.'

We observed staff assisting people individually with their meals and they were ready at other times to respond to any needs for assistance

People we asked said they would tell a nurse if they wanted to complain about anything and they felt they would be taken seriously, but no one had seen the written complaints procedure.