Wortley Lodge

About the service

Wortley Lodge is a residential care home registered to provide accommodation and personal care support for up to 3 people with a learning disability or autistic people. At the time of the inspection 3 people were using the service.

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

Right Support: People were kept safe while living at Wortley Lodge and when they accessed their local community. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. People had risk assessments to reduce their known risks and staff followed these and were knowledgeable of people’s needs. Care was regularly reviewed, and staff worked well with the management team and external health professionals to provide information to plan care. 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.

Right Care: Staff were kind and respectful, people had built trusting relationships with care staff and the management team. Staff at Wortley Lodge were welcoming and did not discriminate against people living in the home. Staff knew how to identify and report potential abuse.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected. Independence was supported and encouraged. Staff received full training and support to enable them to provide good care to people that met their needs. People’s dietary requirements were met and choices of meals and drinks were respected.

Right Culture: Managers were supportive of their staff and complimentary of the commitment they had to the role and the people they supported. The atmosphere was warm and people were observed to be relaxed with staff who supported them. The management team performed regular audits of the service to ensure standards were being met and that people received good health care support.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 16 April 2018).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Wortley Lodge accommodates up to three adults with a learning disability and autistic spectrum disorder. The service is set in an adapted house providing accommodation to people over two floors. The ground floor communal areas comprise of an open plan kitchen and dining room and a living room. At the time of our inspection, three people were living at the service.

Wortley Lodge is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the inspection on 8 March 2018, we found that the provider had made sufficient improvements and were no longer in breach of a legal requirement.

The provider maintained systems to safeguard people from harm and abuse. People told us they felt safe living at the service. Staff knew types and signs of abuse and how to report abuse and poor care. People’s risk assessments were specific to their needs. They provided sufficient information to staff on the risks associated to people’s health and care, and measures on how to reduce those risks. The provider had sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and recruited suitable staff to support people at risk. Staff followed appropriate infection control practices to avoid the spread of infection.

People told us their needs were met. Staff were appropriately inducted and received regular training and supervision to deliver effective care. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met and told us they were happy with the food. Staff supported people in accessing healthcare services and followed up on healthcare professionals recommendations. People liked their bedrooms and the premise's adaptations met their individual needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People told us staff gave them choices and asked their permission before supporting them.

Staff were trained in equality and diversity and knew the importance of treating people equally, with dignity and respect. People told us staff were caring, friendly and listened to them. Staff supported people to remain independent by encouraging and assisting them to do things that they could.

People’s care plans, health action plans and hospital passports were regularly reviewed and gave information to staff on how to provide personalised care. Staff worked with people to plan their weekly activities and the weekly activity plan showed people participated in a range of activities. People told us they knew who to speak to if they were not happy about something but had never made a complaint. Staff recorded people’s end of life care wishes and preferences in their care plans.

The management conducted regular audits and monitoring checks to ensure people’s care was delivered as per their care plan, staff received regular training, support and supervision, and premises met health and safety standards. The provider maintained effective systems and processes to ensure people’s safety and quality of care delivery.

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We saw records of the referral forms from the organisations that had referred people to the service.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. We saw staff training records which confirmed that staff had completed safeguarding training.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. We saw that staff who worked at the service had completed applications forms. We saw that people were shortlisted for interviews based on the information in their forms.

We saw a range of monitoring systems in the form of audits. This included audits of peoples' care records and infection control. The staff we spoke with confirmed that results from audits of care plans were discussed at supervisions and areas of improvement were identified.

We spoke to the manager and the deputy manager and they showed us that they were supporting people maintain contact with their families and were supporting them in their activities.

We reviewed three care plans and saw that people's welfare was fully considered. Staff were ensuring that people at the home were being taken to see relevant health professionals to ensure their overall health.

We reviewed the home's system for recording medication and saw that there was an effective system to ensure medications were given to people at the correct time and that the right medication was administered. The deputy manager audited the medication administration record on a monthly basis to ensure that staff responsible for administering medication were doing so in line with their medication policy.

Whilst staff appeared confident and knowledgeable, the management of people's medicines was unsafe and the auditing process was inadequate.

The provider was unable to demonstrate that an ongoing healthcare issue for one individual had been discussed with an appropriate healthcare professional. Staff were offering support but there was no evidence to suggest this was the correct support for this individual.

Staff said they felt supported and were confident they had been given the right training to do their job.

Most records we checked were relevant to the management of the service and were accurate and fit for purpose.