We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Whitby Scheme 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 The Whitby Scheme, you can give feedback on this service.
The Whitby Scheme is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The Whitby Scheme accommodates 35 people across three separate homes, each of which have separate adapted facilities. Abbey House is the most recent addition and accommodates six people, Haven House accommodates six people, Anchor House can accommodate eight people and Endeavour House can accommodate 15 people. Three of the houses are situated close to one another around a courtyard with the fourth located about half a mile away. At the time of our inspection, 33 people were using the service.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection, we found the service remained Good.
There was a registered manager in post who assisted throughout the inspection.
Safe recruitment process had continued to be followed and appropriate pre-employment checks had been completed. A safeguarding policy was in place and staff were aware of the process to follow if they had any concerns. Risk assessments had been developed to reduce the risk of harm occurring. There was a sufficient number of staff on duty to support people.
Medicines had been stored, administered and recorded appropriately. Staff had received medicines training and had their competencies assessed by a senior member of staff. Person protective equipment such as gloves were available to staff to promote good infection control practice.
New staff had completed an induction to the service. Staff training records were up to date and specialist training had also been provided. Regular supervisions and appraisals had been conducted by management and staff told us they felt supported within their role.
People were empowered to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Policies and systems in the service support this practice. Consent to care and treatment was clearly documented and appropriate authorisations were in place when people lacked capacity to make decisions.
People were supported to maintain a balanced diet and people had access to their own GP and other healthcare professionals to promote their health.
People were supported to remain as independent as possible and there was clear emphasis on helping people maintain daily living skills. People were treated with dignity and their choices were respected by staff.
Initial and on-going needs assessments were completed. Transition periods were accommodated to ensure people could move smoothly between services. Care plans had been developed and included background information centred on the individual. There was a complaint policy in place which was displayed around the services in easy read format.
People gave us positive feedback about the management team. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. People were given the opportunity to feedback about the quality of care they received. We saw the management team responded in a timely manner to any feedback provided to enable the service to continuously improve.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The Whitby Scheme provides accommodation, care and support to up to 34 people with mental health needs and/or needs associated with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection 32 people were using the service. The service is provided through four houses, Anchor, Abbey, Haven and Endeavour. Abbey House is the most recent addition and accommodates six people, Haven House accommodates six people, Anchor House can accommodate eight people and Endeavour House can accommodate fourteen people. Three of the houses are situated close to one another around a courtyard with the fourth located about half a mile away.
We undertook an unannounced inspection on the service on 27 October 2015. During this we visited all four houses under the registration. At our last inspection on 21 October 2013 the service was meeting the regulations inspected.
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.
Staff supported people to maintain their safety. Staff carried out assessments to identify any risks to a person’s safety and management plans were in place to address those risks. Staff were aware of signs and symptoms that a person’s physical or mental health may be deteriorating and how to respond to protect people.
There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and staff were deployed with consideration for gender, skill mix and experience. Staff had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs and attended regular relevant training courses.
The environment was kept safe for people to live in, though we observed that Anchor, Haven and Endeavour houses were in need of repair and maintenance work to ensure people were protected from the risk of cross infection. However, staff understood and followed infection control procedures to protect people.
People received their medicines as prescribed and safe medicines management processes were in place.
Staff worked in combination with the community mental health team to ensure people received good support. Any concerns about a person’s health were shared with relevant professionals so people could receive additional support and treatment when required.
People were supported to receive a healthy diet and to have access to food and drink of their choice within their care plans.
Staff encouraged people to undertake activities and supported them to become more independent. People were involved in their care reviews and at every stage of their care. Their opinions and ideas were listened to and taken into consideration. Staff spent time engaging people in conversations and spoke with them politely and respectfully.
People were encouraged to express their opinions and views about the service. There were regular meetings with people and individual support was provided through a key worker system.
Staff were supported by their manager and felt able to raise any concerns they had or suggestions to improve the service. The staff team had regular meetings where they were encouraged to contribute their ideas about the improvement of the service.
The registered manager had developed a comprehensive system of quality assurance and monitoring checks and the results of these were shared in meetings. The registered manager used the results of these to inform improvements.
We saw that people had a care plan in place that described the support they required. People who used the service told us “I can have a say in how my care and support is provided” and “The staff are all right they look after me all the time”. Interactions observed were relaxed and positive.
People told us they felt safe and if they had any concerns they would tell the manager or a senior member of staff. We saw that staff had been thoroughly checked, before they started work, to ensure they were suitable to work with people who may be vulnerable.
We saw that medication was managed appropriately. People were encouraged to manage their own medication and where this happened risk assessments were in place to ensure people remained safe.
Staff told us they received support from the manager. They receive regular supervision and training. This meant the staff had the skills to support people with different needs.
We saw there was an effective system in place to monitor, identify, assess and manage the risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others.
People told us that the staff always made time to speak to them about their care plans. They said they helped organise the reviews and it was up to them who they invited to discuss how they were getting on.
We saw minutes from the Your Voice meetings where the menus were discussed. People who lived in the Whitby Scheme were encouraged to assist with menu planning, writing shopping lists, doing the shopping and cooking the meals.
We spoke with eight people who used the service and they told us that if they had a complaint they would tell their key worker or the manager if they were not happy. People told us if they complained to staff then the staff always took them seriously and dealt with their concerns sympathetically.
People living in The Whitby Scheme said that they liked the house they were in and enjoyed having their own bedroom. One person showed us their room and they had personalised it to their own liking. People told us they had decided which house they wanted to live in. Health and safety risk assessments were in place with regard to fire, moving and handling and daily activities of living.
Staff told us that they were getting used to the changes introduced by the new company. Some staff told us that the manager was approachable and operated an open door policy. Other staff told us they did not have any confidence in the manager and would not approach her formally if they were unhappy with anything.