• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Windmill Care Centre

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

104 Bath Road, Slough, Berkshire, SL1 3SY (01753) 213010

Provided and run by:
Life Style Care (2011) plc

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

All Inspections

15 and 16 July 2014

During a routine inspection

Overall summary We carried out this unannounced inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This unannounced inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which looks at the overall quality of the service.

Windmill Care Centre provides accommodation and nursing care for up to 53 older people over three floors. The first floor can accommodate up to 23 people who live with dementia. At the time of our visit there were 40 people living at the service.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

We spoke with 13 people who were living at Windmill Care Centre, 5 relatives, 14 members of the nursing and care staff team and with the manager of the home. We also spoke with two senior managers for the provider and with a GP.

People who lived in Windmill Care Centre and their relatives told us they were very satisfied with the care they received or observed. They said staff were caring and competent and communication between themselves and staff was good. They told us they were involved with their care, treated with respect and their dignity was protected.

People could be at risk from equipment which had not been maintained appropriately as routine maintenance had not consistently been carried out on fire alarms and smoke detectors and the provider had not always recorded when equipment had been tested.

Health and social care professionals involved with Windmill Care Centre and the people who lived there, told us there had recently been significant improvements in the standard of pressure care and associated care records. However we found in some cases further improvement was required to ensure care records were consistently well-completed.

Some care records were incomplete. For example, some people’s weight had not been recorded monthly and staff had not consistently recorded if they had assessed a person’s pain or their risk of depression. Care records could not always be relied upon to accurately reflect people’s care needs or the care provided.

People were offered choice and given the time to make decisions, for example about what they ate or if they wanted to participate in activities.

The service’s recruitment process included checks which protected people from the employment of unsuitable people.

Staff at all levels had a good understanding of the care needs of people and how these were to be met. Where people did not have capacity to make certain decisions about their care, there was a robust process in place and being followed to ensure that any decisions being made on their behalf were in their best interests.

Staff were supported through training and supervision. They knew how to identify signs of abuse and how to report it. Staff training was being monitored so updates could be identified and planned for. People could be confident their care was provided by staff who had received up to date training.

There was very positive interaction between staff and people they cared for. People told us they would like more activities outside of the home. This was being actively addressed; however there had been some disruption to the choice of activities due to staff sickness. We saw activity sessions took place on both days of our visit. One to one sessions were also programmed for individuals who might not be able or choose to access activities within the home.

Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place. These had identified areas that needed improvement, including care and maintenance records. An action plan with expected completion dates was in place. This showed where improvement were required this had been identified by the provider and action was planned to improve the service for people.

15, 25 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people using the service but they were not always able to tell us their views about their care. We relied upon our observations of care, speaking with staff and looking at records to help us understand people's experiences.

We found care plans were in place for each person. These documented people’s needs and how they were to be met. Risk assessments had been written to reduce the likelihood of injury to people. We saw people had access to community healthcare professionals such as GPs and chiropodists, to help keep them healthy and well.

People were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration. Care plans contained information about supporting people with their nutrition and hydration needs. People were screened for the likelihood of developing malnutrition and weighed regularly. Weight loss was reported to people’s GPs, for advice.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. We looked at staff rotas and shift planning records. These reflected there were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. We observed staff interacted well with people living at the service. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of people’s care requirements and how these needed to be met.

10 August 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We spoke with one person living at the service about standards of cleanliness. They said the accommodation was ''always clean, they clean every day.''

31 May 2012

During a routine inspection

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) as part of this inspection visit. SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. It involves spending time observing how people's care is delivered and the interactions between staff and people using the service. It provides a valuable way of assessing people's overall well being.

We spent time in one of the lounges observing the morning routine. We saw that staff offered people the choice of having breakfast in the dining room or remaining in the lounge. We noticed that people remaining in the lounge had their food placed on side tables. We saw that in some cases the tables were too low for people to sit comfortably and eat, resulting in them leaning over and spilling their food.

We saw that staff offered people choices of food and drink and provided them with the options they wanted. Where people needed help to manage their meal, this was done gently and in a dignified manner. Staff spoke with people as they were helping them and made sure they had had enough to eat and drink.

We saw that staff were attentive to people's needs. For example, one person was offered a cushion to make them more comfortable in an armchair and a window was closed when another person made a comment about feeling cold.

We observed a nurse giving medication. Each time they checked that the person had a drink to take their medication with and explained to them what they were doing. They made sure that all tablets had been taken before moving on to the next person.

We observed staff carry out four moving and handling manoeuvres. Each time two staff were present. They explained what they needed to do before carrying out any actions and spoke calmly and reassured people they were helping. Each manoeuvre was carried out safely.

We saw that staff communicated well with each other to make sure that people's needs were being met and that someone always remained in the lounge to supervise people.

Staff that we spoke with said they usually worked in the same part of the building. They said that there was lots of training being arranged by the new provider. Two agency staff we spoke with said they had been working at the service regularly, to maintain consistency for people. They said they were going to be joining the staff team as permanent members of staff. A new member of staff said they were working supernumerary and undertaking induction and training. One person said of the staff 'they're all good here'.