You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 1 March 2017

This inspection took place on 21 February 2017 and was unannounced. At our previous inspection in October 2015 we had concerns that people's care records were not up to date and reflective of their current care needs. We found that the systems the provider had in place to monitor and improve the service were not in use so were not effective. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of these Regulations.

Westleigh provides accommodation and personal care for up to 18 people experiencing enduring mental illness. The service is provided by Warrington Community Living, a registered charity and non-profit making organisation. There were 18 people using the service at the time of this inspection.

There was 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.

People were being safeguarded from abuse as staff and the management team followed the local safeguarding procedures if they suspected someone had suffered potential abuse. People who used the service were encouraged to report any concerns or potential abuse.

Risks of harm to people were assessed and action was taken to minimise the risks through the effective use of risk assessment. Staff knew people's risks and followed their risk assessments to keep people safe.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff to keep people safe and meet their needs in a timely manner.

Staff had been recruited using safe recruitment procedures to ensure they were of good character and fit to work with people who used the service.

People's medicines were stored and administered safely by trained staff. Medication was regularly checked and audited.

The principles of The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were being followed as the provider was ensuring that people were consenting to their care.

Staff told us and we saw they had received training and were supported to be effective in their roles.

People were supported to maintain a healthy diet dependent on their individual preferences. People received regular health care support and were referred to other health care agencies for support and advice if they became unwell or their needs changed.

People were treated with dignity and respect and their right to privacy was upheld. People were offered choices and were fully involved in the planning of their care. People were encouraged to be as independent as they were able to be.

Care was personalised and met people's individual needs and preferences. People were involved in the planning of their care and this was regularly reviewed. People's care records were clear and comprehensive and reflective of people's current care needs.

People were supported to participate in hobbies and activities of their choice within the home and local community.

People felt listened to and people's complaints and suggestions were taken seriously and acted upon.

The systems the provider had in place to monitor and improve the quality of service were effective in delivering good quality care for people who used the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 1 March 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from the risk of abuse as the staff and registered manager knew what to do if they suspected someone had suffered potential abuse.

Risks of harm to people were assessed and minimised through the staff knowledge of people's risks and the effective use of risk assessments.

People's medicines were stored and administered safely.

There were sufficient suitably trained staff to safely meet the needs of people who used the service. New staff were employed through safe recruitment procedures.

Effective

Good

Updated 1 March 2017

The service was effective.

The provider followed the principles of the MCA to ensure that people consented to or were supported to consent to their care when they lacked mental capacity.

People were cared for by staff who were supported and received training to be effective in their role.

People were offered food and drink of their choice and their nutritional needs were met.

People received support from a range of health care professionals when they became unwell or their health care needs changed.

Caring

Good

Updated 1 March 2017

The service was caring.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

People were encouraged to be as independent as they were able to be.

People's right to privacy was upheld.

Responsive

Good

Updated 1 March 2017

The service was responsive.

People received care that reflected their individual needs and preferences.

The provider had a complaints procedure and people knew how to complain. People's requests and suggestions were listened to and acted upon.

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 March 2017

The service was well led.

There was a registered manager in post who had made improvements to the quality of the service.

The systems the provider had in place to monitor and improve the service were effective in delivering good quality care.

People who used the service and the staff liked and respected the registered manager.