You are here

Watts Healthcare Ltd Good Also known as Sherwood House Residential Home

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 June 2021

About the service

Watts Healthcare Ltd, also known as Sherwood House, is a residential care home providing personal care to 15 people at the time of the inspection. People were aged 65 and over and younger adults with care needs. Some people had physical disabilities and mental health needs. One person was cared for in bed. One person was in hospital at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 32 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People looked relaxed and happy, there was plenty of laughter, fun and interaction. People told us, “I love it. I want to stay here for the rest of my life” and “We do have some fun here.” Relatives told us, “I saw mum on Tuesday, it made me very happy to see mum looking so well”; “Hand on my heart [it was the] best decision for mum [to live at the service]”; “[It is an] incredible place” and “Ten stars for them.”

We were not assured that the provider had been admitting people safely to the service. People had not always been isolated for the required amount of time on admission. We signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach. Staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) and followed guidance to make sure this was disposed of safely. Staff had access to PPE whenever they needed it. The service was clean, and all areas of the service were regularly cleaned.

Systems to manage the risk of legionella infection were not robust. Empty room flushing had not been carried out as required. The registered manager made improvement to the processes and systems within the service during the inspection, such as implementing the required water flushing of empty rooms. They also arranged for a contractor to attend the service and carry out a legionella risk assessment and checks.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff had received training to make sure they had the information they needed to keep people safe. Risks to people’s individual health and wellbeing had been assessed and were well managed. People’s medicines were well managed. If people or their relatives wanted to complain they knew how to do so.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The service was well-led. The management team carried out the appropriate checks to ensure that the quality of the service was continuously reviewed, improved and evolved to meet people’s changing needs. The registered manager promoted an open culture and was a visible presence in the service, staff felt listened to and valued.

People were treated with dignity and respect. People’s views about how they preferred to receive their care were listened to and respected. People told us staff were kind and caring.

People had access to a range of different activities throughout the week. People told us that they took part in these and that they were enjoyable. Activities were also provided for people who received their care and treatment in bed.

People received good quality care, support and treatment including when they reached the end of their lives. People had been involved in planning and discussions about their wishes and preferences in relation to their end of life care.

When people needed medical attention, this was quickly identified, and appropriate action was taken. For example, if people were losing weight referrals were made to dieticians, or if people fell regularly, they were referred to a fall’s clinic.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 23 August 2019 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspect

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 17 June 2021

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 June 2021

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 June 2021

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 June 2021

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 June 2021

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.