19 Wheathill Road

19 Wheathill road is a care home providing personal care and accommodation to up to 5 adults with mental health needs. At the time of the inspection, 5 people were using the service.

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

People told us they felt safe. Staff understood the types of abuse that could occur and the action to take if they had any concerns. Risks to people were assessed and safely managed. The home had a system in place to record accidents and incidents and acted on them in a timely manner. Medicines were stored, administered, managed safely and accurate records were maintained. However, one person’s two liquid medicines bottles did not have the date of opening. There were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs in a timely manner and the provider followed safe recruitment practices. People were protected from the risk of infection as staff followed practices that reduced the risk of infection.

Staff were supported through regular training and supervisions so that they were effectively able to carry out their roles. People's needs were assessed, to ensure their needs could be met. The deputy manager and staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). 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. Staff told us they asked for people's consent before offering support. People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and had access to healthcare professionals when required to maintain good health.

People and their relatives told us, staff were caring, considerate and respected their privacy, dignity, and independence. They said staff involved them in making decisions about their care and support requirements.

People's care plans were reflective of their individual care needs and preferences and care plans were reviewed on a regular basis. People were aware of the home's complaints procedures and knew how to raise a complaint. People's cultural needs and religious beliefs were recorded. The deputy manager knew what to do if someone required end of life care.

The provider had effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Regular staff and residents' meetings were held, and feedback was also sought from people about the service. The provider worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure people's needs were planned and 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 15 November 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Follow up

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

We found the following examples of good practice.

The provider screened all visitors to the home for symptoms of acute respiratory infection before they could enter the home. Visitors were supported to follow the government's guidance on hand washing, sanitising, wearing personal protective equipment (PPE), temperature checks, and that they had been fully vaccinated before entering the home and social distancing whilst on the premises.

There was an enhanced COVID-19 testing program in place for people using the service and for staff. When people or staff showed symptoms they were required to self-isolate. We observed staff wearing appropriate PPE and socially distancing throughout our visit.

There had been no new admission to the home during the pandemic.

The registered manager told us, they were always well stocked with PPE, which included hand sanitiser, disposable aprons, mask, gloves, face shield. Staff were trained on how and when to use PPE and their disposal, as appropriate. Following our feedback onsite, the registered manager straight away arranged for a dedicated place for staff donning and doffing of PPE.

The provider carried out regular COVID-19 PCR and LFT tests and temperature checks for people and staff in line with the government guidelines.

During our visit we saw the home was very clean throughout. Staff on duty maintained a cleaning schedule that was monitored regularly by the registered manager.

There had always been enough staff to meet people's needs throughout the pandemic. All staff had received training on COVID-19, infection control, the use of PPE, and they had been fully vaccinated.

The provider had a COVID-19 specific policy and procedures, and a contingency plan in place which they had followed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The operations director and the deputy manager told us there were no restrictions on visiting at the home in accordance with the current guidance.

19 Wheathill road provides accommodation for people who require nursing or personal care for up to five adults who have a range of needs including mental health. There were five people receiving personal care and support at the time of our 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.

The service knew how to keep people safe. The service had clear procedures to recognise and respond to abuse. The registered manager and staff completed safeguarding training. Staff completed risk assessments for every person who used the service with detailed guidance to reduce risks. The service had a system to manage accidents and incidents to reduce reoccurrence.

The service had enough staff to support people. The service carried out satisfactory background checks of staff before they started working. The service had arrangements to deal with emergencies. Staff supported people so they took their medicine safely.

The service provided induction and training to staff to help them undertake their role. The service supported staff through supervision and appraisal.

People’s consent was sought before care was provided. At the time of inspection no one was subject to continuous control and supervision and people could leave the service.

Staff supported people to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. Staff supported people to access healthcare services they required.

Staff considered people’s personal choices, general wellbeing and activities. Staff supported people to make day to day life choices and maintain relationships with their family. Staff supported people in a way which was kind, caring and respectful. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff prepared care plans for every person that were tailored to meet their individual needs. Staff reviewed people’s care plans and updated to reflect their current needs.

The service had a clear policy and procedure about managing complaints. People knew how to complain.

The service sought the views of people. Staff felt supported by the manager. The provider had an effective system to assess and monitor the quality of the care people received. The service had systems to monitor the safety of people’s accommodation to minimise risks to people. The service used the audits to learn how to improve and what action to take. The service worked effectively in partnership with health and social care professionals and commissioners.