You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 26 April 2018

New Willow House provides a short stay respite service for adults with a learning disability. The home is a two storey building with a number of adaptations to meet the needs of people who use the service. Accommodation comprises of four bedrooms and spacious communal areas. The home is close to transport links and is within easy reach of local amenities.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

New Willow House was registered by CQC on 18 November 2016. This was the homes first rated inspection.

Relatives told us they were confident that people were safe at New Willow House.

There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm. They had their medicines administered safely. Risks to people's health and well-being were identified, planned for and managed. There were sufficient competent and experienced staff to provide people with appropriate support when they needed it.

Staff had a good understanding about the signs of abuse and were aware of what to do if they suspected abuse was taking place. People's needs were assessed before and when they moved into the home and on an ongoing basis to reflect changes in their needs.

Clear and well thought out arrangements were in place for people planning to access the service which helped to reduce anxiety about this change.

Relatives knew how to make a complaint and were sure they would be listened to and have any concerns acted upon.

People were supported to have 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.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health and social care professionals when necessary.

The registered manager and staff had created a warm welcoming atmosphere for people and their families. There were close relationships with social and healthcare professionals and the quality of the service was reviewed regularly.

We observed excellent relationships between people and observed the senior management team and staff interacting with people in a caring, good humoured and friendly manner. Management and staff demonstrated understanding of people's personal preferences and needs. People appeared happy and relaxed during our visit.

A robust system for staff recruitment, induction and training was in place. This enabled the staff to support people effectively and safely.

The home was clean, tidy and homely in character. There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection. Staff were trained in infection control.

Electrical and gas appliances were serviced regularly. Each person had a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP) and there was a business plan for any unforeseen emergencies.

The managers and staff demonstrated a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The MCA and DoLS provide legal safeguards for people who are unable to make their own decisions.

Effective quality assurance audits were in place to monitor the service. The service regularly sought feedback from the people who lived there and their relatives. Staff had regular supervisions and were invited to team meetings. Staff told us that they enjoyed working at the service and felt that they were listened to by the managers.

The service had been developed and designed in line with the principles that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance; these values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. This policy asserts that people with learning disabilities and autism using a service should

Inspection areas



Updated 26 April 2018

The service was safe

The service used the local authority safeguarding procedures to report any safeguarding issues.

Staff had been trained in safeguarding themes and were aware of their responsibilities to report any possible abuse.

Staff had been trained in medicines administration and managers audited the system and checked staff competence.

Staff were recruited robustly to ensure they were safe to work with vulnerable adults.



Updated 26 April 2018

The service was effective

Staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff had been trained in the MCA and DoLS and could recognise what a deprivation of liberty was and how they must protect people�s rights.

People were supported to take a nutritious diet in a way that met their needs.

Induction, training and supervision gave staff the knowledge and support they needed to satisfactorily care for the people who used the service.



Updated 26 April 2018

The service was caring.

Relatives told us staff were helpful and kind.

Visitors said they were welcomed into the home.

We saw that people were offered choice in many aspects of their lives.

We saw people were treated with kindness, care and dignity and had a relaxed and easy relationship with the staff members who clearly knew them well.



Updated 26 April 2018

The service was responsive

There was a suitable complaints procedure for people to voice their concerns. The manager of the home and area manager responded to any concerns or incidents in a timely manner and analysed them to try to improve the service.

People were supported to engage in community and individual activities as they preferred.

Care plans were regularly reviewed and contained sufficient details for staff to deliver care.



Updated 26 April 2018

The service was well-led

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of care and service provision.

Policies, procedures and other relevant documents were reviewed regularly to help ensure staff had up to date information.

Relatives and staff we spoke with told us they felt supported and could approach managers when they wished.