Housing 21 - Winehala Court

Housing 21 – Winehala Court is an extra care service made up of 60 self-contained flats. The service is registered to provide personal care to people living in these flats. At the time of our inspection there were 26 people using the service who required support with personal care. People had a range of needs including physical disabilities, health conditions and dementia.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

At the time of the inspection, the location did not care or support for anyone with a learning disability or an autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.

People told us they felt safe when receiving support from staff. Risks had been assessed and staff followed guidance in care plans to support people safely. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed and updated with any changes to people’s care needs. People received support at agreed times and staff had been safely recruited. People received their medicines as prescribed and staff followed infection control guidance to reduce the risk of cross infection.

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 were complementary about the care they received. People felt respected and treated with dignity by the staff team. Staff spoke with fondness about the people they supported and promoted their independence where possible.

People, relatives, and staff expressed confidence in the registered manager and the wider management team. The registered manager was aware of their regulatory responsibilities and audits were in place to review the quality of care delivered. Where concerns were identified, actions were implemented to drive improvements. People, staff and visiting professionals had been asked to share their feedback about the service and the staff team worked in partnership with external professionals to ensure people’s needs were met.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 19 September 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. We completed a focused inspection to review safe, caring and well-led only.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Housing 21 – Winehala Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Housing and Care 21-Winehala Court is an extra care service that contains 60 self contained flats. The service is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide personal care to people living in these flats. At the time of the inspection there were 30 people using the service who required support with their personal care needs. People who required this care had a range of support needs, including older people living with dementia, people with disabilities and people with medical conditions such as Parkinson’s Disease.

A registered manager was 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 supported by a care staff team who went over and above the call of duty to ensure they felt valued and important. Care staff were kind and caring towards people and demonstrated a high level of passion and commitment in their roles. People were enabled to be as independent as possible in all areas of their lives, including in ways they had not necessarily considered possible before moving to the service. People’s privacy and dignity were respected and promoted. People were enabled to maintain relationships that were important to them. People were supported to remain at home where possible at the end of their lives and were cared for in a kind and dignified way.

People felt the management of the service was excellent. They felt their voices were heard and that they were actively involved, consulted and contributed to the development of the service. It was evident that the provider was committed to working in partnership with people to ensure they felt consulted, empowered. People were supported by a care staff team who felt supported and motivated in their roles.

People were supported by a management team who were open, transparent and committed to a culture of continuous learning and improvement. The provider and management team had effective systems in place to ensure the quality of service provided to people was good and was continually improved.

People were supported by a staff team who knew how to protect them from potential abuse. Staff understood the risks to people they supported and how to keep them safe in an enabling way without limiting their opportunities for enjoyment and quality of life. People were supported by sufficient numbers of care staff who had been recruited safely for their roles. People received their medicines safely and as prescribed.

People were supported by care staff who had the skills they needed to care for them effectively. Care staff were led by a management team who were also well supported and had access to training and development opportunities. This originated from the provider’s dedication to endorse a culture of excellence through consultation with other leading organisations, research and reflective practice; this enabled them to continuously improve and develop. The provider had systems in place to enable them to monitor the safety and effectiveness of the service, proactively identify further areas and opportunities for development as well as sustain the improvements made. People were enabled to consent to the care and support they received. People’s rights were upheld by the effective use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were involved in making decisions about the care they received. Staff understood and recognised the diversity of people’s social and cultural needs and ensured that this was reflected in the care they provided, and the opportunities that were available to people. Care provided met people’s needs and preferences and was regularly reviewed. People were enabled to participate in social activities with the support of care staff.

People felt able to raise complaints and concerns where needed. Where complaints had been received these were responded to appropriately.

Winehala Court is a extra care housing scheme that provides accommodation and care for up to 60 people. As part of the scheme the service is registered with CQC to provide personal care to people living at the scheme. At the time of the inspection there were 38 people using the service for support with personal care. 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 protected by a staff and management team who knew how to recognise and report potential signs of abuse. Staff understood the potential risks to people’s safety and knew how to reduce the risk of harm to people. People were supported by sufficient numbers of care staff who had been recruited safely for their roles.

People were protected by medicines management systems that had recently been improved. However, some improvements were still required to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.

Where people lacked the capacity to make decisions about, or consent to their care, decisions were not always made in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and in people’s best interests. People were supported by staff who had the skills to support them effectively in most areas of their care. Training in the MCA was not sufficient to give staff or managers the knowledge required to protect people’s rights. People were supported to meet their nutritional needs effectively. People were supported to meet their day to day health needs.

People were supported by a staff team who were caring in their approach and understood their needs. People were enabled to make day to day choices about their care. People’s privacy, dignity and independence were promoted and they were treated with respect. People were supported to maintain important relationships with friends and relatives.

People and their representatives were involved in planning and reviewing their care. The care people received met their needs and preferences and this was reflected in their care plan. People were supported to take part in leisure opportunities. People told us they knew how to complain and felt confident their concerns would be addressed by management.

People spoke highly of the management of the service and felt well supported and listened to. People were supported by a committed, motivated staff team who felt supported by the registered manager. Quality assurance checks were completed across the service to identify areas for improvement and further develop the service provided to people.

The manager had sent us an action plan telling us how they planned to make the required improvements. We used their action plan as the basis of our inspection. We looked at care records and spoke to staff as part of the inspection. The care coordinater sent us information to support the improvements following our inspection.

At this inspection we found the service had made improvements and people's care and welfare needs were being met through clear, effective communication.

Winehala Court is an Extra Care Housing provision for people aged 55 years and over. Some of the people living at the Court had care requirements; staff were available 24 hours a day to provide care and support. Winehala Court were not required to be registered with CQC for accommodation, as people were living in their own homes. They were registered to deliver personal care to people; this is the area we looked at during the inspection.

We discussed care delivery with five staff members; generally the staff were knowledgeable regarding the care requirements of people living at the court. The care plans we viewed did not hold all the necessary assessments and care plans to ensure care was delivered in a consistent manner. Systems were in place for managing and recording medication. A reporting system was in use to identify errors or concerns.

Prior to commencing work at Winehala Court staff undertook an induction. Mandatory training was available throughout the year. Staff had the opportunity for one to one discussions and meetings with the manager or a member of the management team.