Waring Close

Updated 3 January 2019

The inspection:

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.

Inspection team:

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type:

Waring Close is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service accommodates up to 16 people in three purpose-built buildings. At the time of our visit there were 16 people using the service.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

This inspection was announced and took place on 4 December 2018. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of our inspection visit because people and staff are often out and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

What we did:

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). We used information the provider sent us in the PIR. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed other information that we held about the service such as notifications. These are events that happen in the service that the provider is required to tell us about. We also considered the last inspection report and we contacted commissioners who had a contract with the service.

We did not speak with any people during our inspection due to their communication difficulties. However, we spent a short period of time in two peoples’ company and observed how staff supported people. We attempted to speak with a relative of one of the people but they did not return our telephone call.

The registered manager was away on the day of the inspection, but we spoke with a team leader and the area manager who was visiting the service. After our visit the area manager sent information that was not readily available during our visit.

We looked at the care records of three people who used the service. We were shown throughout the three buildings. We also looked at records in relation to the management of the service such as staff recruitment files, quality assurance checks, staff training, and how the premises were maintained, including fire safety.

Updated 3 January 2019

What life is like for people using this service:

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.

People continued to receive safe care. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures that should be followed to report incidents of harm or concern.

Risk assessments were in place to manage potential risks within people’s lives, whilst also promoting their independence.

People were supported to be as independent as possible, often through activities that carried a risk of injury such as swimming and horse riding. These activities were risk assessed to mitigate risk of injury and without unduly restricting people from exercising choice.

The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service.

Safe staffing levels were in place to meet people's needs.

There were procedures in place for evacuating people with limited mobility in the event of an emergency.

Infection control procedures were in place that were based on Code of Practice on the prevention and control of infections. The premises, including communal areas and people rooms were clean and fresh.

Staff training had training that provided them with knowledge they needed to perform their roles. The management team supported staff to put their training into practice. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs. Two staff had won national awards in recognition of their support of people who used the service.

People were supported with their nutritional needs.

Staff obtained people's consent before they provided care and support. 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.

Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect and spent time getting to know them and their specific needs and wishes. Care plans reflected people’s likes and dislikes, and staff spoke with people in a friendly manner, addressing them by their preferred name. We saw positive and friendly interactions between staff and people. Staff acted professionally and recognised professional boundaries without compromising the quality of care and support.

People or their relatives were involved in the planning of care and could contribute to the way in which they were supported. People and their relatives were involved in reviewing their care and making any necessary changes if they wanted.

People participated in a wide range of meaningful and stimulating activities.

Care plans were detailed and included information about the support people required. People experienced outstanding outcomes because of the care and support they received.

People knew how to raise any complaints or concerns. These were acted upon promptly and where necessary the management team reviewed care plan and made changes.

The service continued to be well managed. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. Actions were taken and improvements were made when required.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 23 June 2016).

About the service: Waring Close is care home that was providing personal care to 16 people at the time of the inspection.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.