You are here

Archived: Wansbeck Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 11 June 2014
Date of Publication: 22 July 2014
Inspection Report published 22 July 2014 PDF

People should be cared for in safe and accessible surroundings that support their health and welfare (outcome 10)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are in safe, accessible surroundings that promote their wellbeing.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 11 June 2014, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider. We talked with other authorities and talked with local groups of people in the community or voluntary sector.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Our judgement

People who used the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.

Reasons for our judgement

When we last inspected the service on the 19 March 2014, we told the provider that they were not meeting this regulation. We said, “People who used the service, staff and visitors were not fully protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.” We found that some areas of the home were not in a fit state. There was peeling paintwork and the water taps in some en-suite rooms were not working. We judged that this had a moderate impact on people who used the service and told the provider to take action.

Following our inspection, the provider wrote to us and told us what actions they were going to take to improve.

The home comprised of an older building formerly a vicarage and a newer purpose built extension. It was set out over three levels with accommodation on the ground and first floors. The third floor was used as a storage area. The building was divided into four smaller areas which staff explained were called houses and not units since they were people’s homes. Each house had its own name so there was a clear identity for each area of the home. The houses were called, Meadow View, Pine Tree, River Bank and Sea View and contained around 10 single bedrooms, many of which had private en-suite facilities. Each house had its own lounge/dining area which provided comfortable, family-style rooms for people to relax, engage in activities and enjoy their meals.

We saw that staff were working towards improving the home’s dementia design to help people find their way around. There were large picture signs on bathroom and toilet doors. Bedroom doors had names and familiar pictures to help people distinguish their own door. The houses were small units which had short corridors so people could find their way more easily to the lounge/dining rooms. There were also visual clues for people including menus outside the dining room areas.

Staff had started to decorate each house in keeping with its name to aid orientation and stimulate people’s senses. We saw that Meadow View had been decorated with flowers and trellises. The flowers could be “picked” from the corridor walls and placed into a “flower pot.” Some bathrooms were pleasantly decorated with cosmetic touches, such as wall murals and pictures that helped to make these rooms relaxing places in which to bathe. One care worker informed us, “It’s all to do with colour, it’s stimulating. They [people] seem a lot better.” The care worker also informed us that the themed decoration had a positive affect not only on people who lived there, but also on staff. She explained, “The morale has totally lifted, the home feels a lot better.” One relative told us, “There’s been a lot done with the environment to make it more in keeping with people’s needs.”

There was a small area between two of the houses on the first floor which relatives called the “indoor garden” area. A tree had been painted on the wall and photos of people, their family and staff were attached to “leaves” on the branches. A member of staff informed us, “This is Wansbeck Care Home’s Family tree. It’s what we’re all about, we’re a family.” Garden type seating had been placed in this area. There was a room off this area which had been turned into a café called, “Cup Cake Café.”

We observed that there were keypad entry doors between each of the houses. The provider may find it useful to note that three relatives with whom we spoke, told us that they preferred these doors to be open so that people could have unrestricted access to areas such as the indoor garden and Cup Cake Café. In addition, they informed us that having these doors open would help staff be more “visible”. We spoke with the manager about these comments. She informed us that these doors were open at various times throughout the day. She told us that she would continue to consider the comments that had been raised.

There were seated areas in corridors for people to rest. The provider may find it useful to note that two relatives with whom we sp