• Care Home
  • Care home

Wheatfield Drive

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

17 Wheatfield Drive, Cranbrook, Kent, TN17 3LU (01580) 715249

Provided and run by:
The Grange (2016) Ltd

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 25 September 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on the 28 and 29 August 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

We used information the registered persons sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also examined other information we held about the service. This included notifications of incidents that the registered persons had sent us since our last inspection. These are events that happened in the service that the registered persons are required to tell us about.

We spoke to three people using the service. We also spoke with two support staff, the registered manager and the chief executive.

We looked at care records for two people receiving a service. We also looked at records that related to how the service was managed including training, staff recruitment and some quality assurance records. We asked the chief executive to send us other quality assurance records after the inspection, and they sent these to us in a timely manner.

Overall inspection


Updated 25 September 2018

This inspection was carried out on 28 and 29 August 2018 and was unannounced.

Wheatfield Drive is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and 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. Wheatfield Drive is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for a maximum of 3 people. The home specialises in providing care to people with learning disabilities and has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. At the time of our inspection there were three people living in the service, and it is arranged over two floors.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

At the last inspection on 17 July 2017, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements because Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications had not been made for people who needed support if they attempted to leave the service. At this inspection we found the service had made improvements and staff were following the principles of the MCA.

People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff were trained in how to identify and report concerns. Managers knew how to report concerns. Risks to people and the environment were assessed, and staff acted to reduce those risks identified. These risks were regularly reviewed. There were enough staff on shift to meet the needs of people, and those new to the service were recruited safely. Rotas were organised fairly. People received their medicines safely. Staff received training and had their competency checked. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection. We found the service to be clean and tidy. The registered manager took steps to ensure lessons were learned when things went wrong.

People had their care delivered in line with current legislation and best practice guidance. Training was provided to staff which was built around the needs of those using the service. People were involved in devising their own weekly menu and had choice and control over what and when they ate. Staff were trained to make sure food was handled safely. Staff followed the guidance from healthcare professionals. People had access to health care and treatment and staff supported people to understand what the treatment meant. Staff knew how to seek consent from people and were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice Best interest meetings were held when needed. Applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were sent to the local authority when required.

People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect. Staff knew people and their needs well, and had the time to listen to people express their feelings and views. Staff knew to refer to lay advocates if a person needed further support. People were encouraged to be independent. People had their privacy and dignity respected and promoted. People’s confidential information was kept private.

People were in control of how their support was provided, and support was provided in a personalised way. Each person had their own care plan which was regularly reviewed. People were supported to take part in activities of their choosing. People said they knew how to raise a complaint and would do so if they needed to. The registered provider was beginning to consider how they might support people at the end of their lives to have a dignified death by speaking to them about their preferences.

The registered manager had the skills and experience to lead the service. They had oversight of the daily culture in the service, which included the attitudes, performance and behaviour of staff. The culture was transparent and honest, and staff told us they felt valued and proud to work for the organisation. People, their families and staff were encouraged to be engaged and involved in the service. There were growing links with the local community.