Archived: Wesley Lodge

Updated 8 October 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This unannounced inspection took place on 20 September 2016. Due to the number of people who lived in the home the inspection team consisted of one inspector.

Prior to this inspection we reviewed records held by CQC which included notifications, complaints and any safeguarding concerns. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. This enabled us to ensure we were addressing potential areas of concern at the inspection.

We had asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We did not review the PIR on this occasion because this inspection was a follow up from a previous inspection in 2015.

As part of our inspection we spoke with the registered manager, three staff, three relatives and three health care professionals. We observed staff carrying out their duties, such as assisting people when they required it and helping people with food and drink.

We reviewed a variety of documents which included two people’s care plans, five staff files, training information, medicines records, quality assurance records and policies and procedures in relation to the running of the home.

We last inspected Wesley Lodge in May 2015 where we made recommendations to the provider in relation to recruitment, supporting staff and obtaining feedback from relatives.

Updated 8 October 2016

Wesley Lodge is a care home for up to eight people who have a learning disability, physical disability and complex needs. On the day of the inspection eight people were living in the home.

This was an unannounced inspection that took place on 20 September 2016.

The home had a registered manager. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager assisted us with our inspection on the day.

There was a kind, caring atmosphere in the home where staff displayed an inclusive attitude towards people. Relatives were happy with the care provided. Staff supported people to take part in various activities and staff were attentive to people to help ensure that activities were individualised and meaningful to people.

People had care responsive to their needs and staff knew people extremely well. People who had dietary requirements received appropriate foods and people could choose which foods they had. Staff followed the guidance of healthcare professionals where appropriate and involved healthcare professionals to help ensure people received effective care.

Staff provided care in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Records demonstrated that people’s rights were protected as staff acted in accordance with the MCA when specific decisions needed to be made. Where there were restrictions in place appropriate applications had been submitted to the supervisory body in relation to this.

Staff followed correct and appropriate procedures in administering medicines and medicines were stored safely. Care was provided to people by staff who were trained and received relevant support from their manager. This included regular supervisions and appraisals. Staff told us they felt valued by the registered manager and they worked together well as a team.

Staff understood their role in safeguarding people. They had received training and demonstrated a good understanding of how they would protect people from abuse or potential harm. Staff routinely carried out risk assessments and created plans to minimise known hazards whilst encouraging people’s independence.

In the event of an emergency where the home would have to close, there was a contingency plan in place to help ensure people’s care would continue uninterrupted.

There were sufficient staff in the home to help ensure people received the care and support they required when they required it. This included enabling people to attend their activities. Good recruitment processes were in place to ensure that those staff who were providing the care were suitable to be working in such a setting.

Care plans contained detailed information to guide staff on how someone wished to be cared for. Information included detail around people’s mobility, food and personal care needs. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and backgrounds as detailed in their care plans.

Quality assurance checks were carried out to help ensure the environment was a safe place for people to live and they received a good quality of care. Staff were involved in the running of the home as regular staff meetings were held and they were encouraged to give their feedback. Relatives and other stakeholders were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the care provided through surveys. Relatives told us they told us if they had any concerns they would have no hesitation in speaking with the registered manager.

It was evident the registered manager had good management oversight and staff, relatives and professionals felt the home was well managed. The registered manager was keen to improve the quality of care provided.