The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Westfield Lodge

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Weston Coyney Road, Weston Coyney, Stoke On Trent, Staffordshire, ST3 6ES (01782) 336777

Provided and run by:
Four Seasons (Evedale) Limited

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile
Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

05 February 2015

During a routine inspection

We inspected this service on 5 February 2015. This was an unannounced inspection.

The service was registered to provide accommodation, personal and nursing care for up to 48 people. People who used the service were older people who required residential or nursing care and may have physical and/or mental health needs, such as dementia.

At the time of our inspection 32 people were using the service.

At our previous inspection of May 2014 we found improvements were needed in the Care and Welfare of people, Management and Records. We found that improvements had been made in all these areas.

The provider had recruited a new manager who was in the process of registering with us. 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 from the risk of harm, because staff understood how to recognise and report concerns. Risks were assessed and action was taken to reduce risks of harm.

Sufficient numbers of staff were provided and staff received the training they needed to deliver appropriate and safe care.

Medicines were stored, managed and administered safely.

Staff and the manager understood their responsibilities in relation to The Mental Capacity Act 2005. Where people did not have the capacity to make decisions for them, appropriate action was taken to ensure decisions were made in their best interests.

People’s health and dietary needs were assessed, recorded and acted upon. Access to health care professionals was facilitated.

People and their relatives told us the staff were kind and caring and treated them with respect. Staff were patient and understanding when interacting with people.

People were involved in an assessment of their needs and their care was planned to meet their care preferences. People were also encouraged and enabled to participate in activities that were important to them.

People knew how to raise concerns and felt confident in doing so. They and staff told us the manager was approachable and had made many improvements to the quality of the service.

The quality of service was monitored to ensure the standards expected by the provider where maintained. There were systems in place for monitoring the infection control standards in the home.

16 May 2014

During a routine inspection

This was an unannounced scheduled inspection of the service. This meant it was planned but the provider did not know we were going to inspect. The inspection was carried out by one inspector, who spoke with people who used the service, a relative and staff. They observed interactions and looked at records, including care records, staff training records and medication records

Is it safe?

Care assessments were in place detailing peoples health and social care needs, there was evidence of reviews of health needs and evaluations of care.

Staff we spoke with told us they had received the training they needed to meet people's care, and new staff told us they received a good induction to the service.

Records did not always accurately reflect people's changing care needs. This meant that people were potentially placed at risk of harm.

Systems were in place for the safe management of medication.

Is it caring?

We observed staff providing care and support to people who used the service; they were kind and attentive and knew the people they supported well.

We spoke with eight people who used the service and a relative. One person told us: 'I'd give it eight of ten. The girls are very good'. Another person said: 'We get to be involved in a lot of things, It's bingo this afternoon and we had a meeting the other day. It would be nice to go out more, but when the mini bus is free we do go out a lot'. A relative said: 'I visit every day and I'm made to feel welcome, they always invite me to have something to eat. It's very friendly and most of the staff are lovely'.

Is it responsive?

The provider had a complaints policy and procedure on display in the main foyer of the home, people we spoke with told us they felt able to make a complaint if they needed to and who they should go to. One person we spoke with told us: 'We do say if we're not happy about anything. We had a meeting and told the manager about things we didn't like. He says he will look into them. We will see'! Another person said: 'You can tell them if you're unhappy'.

The manager showed us how annual surveys were completed to seek the views of people who used the service and their supporters. He said: 'When we analyse the feedback we devise an action plan, basically a statement saying what we're going to do about any concerns, and display it on the notice board'.

It is effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed and care plans were usually clear for staff to follow. People received the care they needed at the right times. People's health care needs were met with the appropriate external agencies support.

Is it well led?

The service had systems in place for monitoring the quality of the service and undertaking audits to evaluate how the service was delivered. The registered manager told us that regular meetings with people who used the service, care and other staff helped to ensure improvements were made.

Records we looked at showed that staff had not always received regular supervision or appraisal of their practice. This meant that the provider had not acted to ensure staff were performing to the standards expected.

14, 21 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with eight people who used the service, three relatives, three staff and the acting manager during our inspection. We also telephoned and spoke with a pharmacist, a health care professional and spoke with a fourth staff member.

During this inspection we observed how staff interacted and engaged with people that used the service, checked how the service managed and stored medication, and looked at care records to determine if the care we observed corresponded with the care we had observed.

People we spoke with said, "I'm okay, I can do what I want to do" "The staff are lovely, all I have to do is ask and they come to me. Sometimes they can be busy but usually I don't have to wait". A relative said, "My family and I visit everyday, we have no concerns about the support mum receives. We've had niggles but they have soon been sorted out". Another relative said, "My relative is content and it's much better than the other home".

We looked at how staff were trained and supported, staff told us that they received regular supervision sessions and meetings. We also checked to see if there were enough staff to meet people's needs.

The home has no registered manager in place as required in The Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. The acting manager for the service told us that they had yet to apply and had an application form to complete. The service has not had a registered manager since August 2012.

30 May 2012

During a routine inspection

We visited as part of our scheduled programme. This was an unannounced inspection so the service did not know we were visiting. We were accompanied by an Expert by Experience who talked with people that lived there and their relatives to gain their experiences of living at the home.

People were happy with the care they received. People said that they had choices about their lifestyle. They could get up and go to bed when they wanted to, choose where and how they spent their time. People always had a choice of meals. Comments included: "Happy here", "Food good and there's a choice" and, "No complaints".

People's care needs were assessed and reviewed every month. Care plans were in place that provided the information to make sure they received the care they needed. People were seen by the doctor when needed and received specialist health support for medical conditions such as pressure sore care and for specialist nutritional needs.

People that wanted to had plenty of things to do. There was a range of activities including entertainers coming to the home and trips out for activities including for pub lunches.

We observed that people were encouraged to be as independent as possible and to be involved in aspects of running the home. Minutes from a resident meeting showed they were consulted about the meals and about the activities they chose. We saw that one person took responsibility for the indoor plants and another person was involved in organising a raffle.

All staff received training to keep people safe and to be aware of how to report safeguarding issues. However not all staff had followed the procedures when a recent incident had occurred.

Arrangements were in place to provide staff with the training and supervision they needed to provide people with appropriate care. The service had yet to introduce annual appraisals for staff. An appraisal system would help to make sure that staff were supported in relation to their responsibilities in delivering care and support to people to an appropriate standard.

Systems were in place to review and monitor the service people received.

24 November 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

Information we hold about the home showed that we needed to undertake a monitoring

visit in order to update our records and to establish that people's needs were being safely

met.

We spoke with people living at the home about their daily life, their activities, the staff team, and what it was like to live at the home. People told us they were happy with the way they were cared for by staff. We were also told that where appropriate, individuals were supported in making choices, by involving other professionals, their family and or a representative. This was confirmed during our discussions with family members.