All inspections: Wainfleet - Care Quality Commission

Twenty-nine people were living in the home when we visited.

Due to the complex needs of people living in the home we used a number of different methods to help us understand their experiences. We spoke with two people who lived in the home, six members of staff, two relatives and the registered manager. We also looked at records.

We also sat and watched care staff deliver care to people in the home. This helped us understand the needs of people who could not speak with us.

People told us staff asked for their consent before giving care or treatment, for example giving personal care in the mornings. From our observations we saw this happened. The provider was working with other agencies where people's freedom was restricted in their best interests.

People received care that was safe and appropriate to their needs. A relative told us, 'They give excellent care.'

Medicines were administered to people by staff who had received appropriate training.

The people and relatives we spoke with were complimentary about the care provided by the staff in the home. Staff told us if they were busy they did not have time to talk with people.

We looked at a variety of records relevant to the management of the home. We found they were accurate, up to date and fit for purpose.

We undertook this review because we had identified the home needed to take some action when we visited in May 2012. We only looked at the outcome where we had told them they needed to become compliant with our essential standards.

Due to the complex needs of the people using the service we used a number of different methods to help us understand their experiences. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to understand the needs of people who could not talk with us or found it difficult to do so.

We also looked at records and spoke with care staff and the manager of the home.

From using SOFI we saw people experienced better outcomes at mealtimes. People were not brought to the dining tables too far in advance of their lunch. They received appropriate support from care staff when it was required.

We saw one person receiving appropriate and sensitive support from a member of care staff.

We saw care records were easier to read and understand.

Due to the complex needs of the people using the service we used a number of different methods to help us understand their experiences. We looked at records. These included care plans and minutes of meetings. We also spoke with care staff and people who used the service.

We also sat and watched care staff delivering care to people in the home. This helped us to understand the needs of people who could not talk with us.

People using the service told us they were treated with dignity and respect by the staff. One person told us, 'They always knock on the door and pull the curtains before they help me to wash and dress.' A staff member told us they respected a person's decision to have personal care from a female member of staff only.

The people we spoke with told us they felt well cared for by staff. The people in the home with a memory loss did not always receive the care and support they were entitled to.

People said they felt safe. One person told us, 'If I didn't feel safe I would tell the manager and they would do something about it.'

The staff we spoke with said they felt very well supported by the management team in the home and would have no hesitation in asking for help if they needed it.

Resident and staff meetings were held on a regular basis and quality assurance systems were in place in order to audit the quality of service provided. This meant the service could make improvements if it were found necessary.

Archived: Wainfleet

All Inspections

12 June 2013

During a routine inspection

7 September 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

31 May 2012

During a routine inspection