White House

Updated 23 May 2019

The inspection:

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

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type:

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

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 was an unannounced inspection.

What we did:

Before the inspection, the provider completed 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. The provider returned the PIR and we took this into account when we made the judgements in this report.

We also looked at other information we held about the service, including any statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

During the inspection we spoke with four people and three relatives to obtain their views about the support they received. We spoke with four staff members and the registered manager who was available throughout the inspection.

We observed the care interactions and reviewed care records for four people who used the service and three staff files. We looked at recruitment and training records. We looked at records regarding medicines administration and we acquainted ourselves with a range of records relating to the running of the service. These included incident and accident monitoring, auditing systems and complaints.

After the inspection we contacted two more relatives of people to obtain their view on quality of care provided by the service.

Updated 23 May 2019

About the service:

• White House is a residential care home providing personal care for up to nine people with learning disabilities.

• At the time of the inspection it was providing a service to nine people.

• White House is a large, detached house located near the village of Datchet, just four miles east of Slough town centre. It comprises two single bedrooms on the ground floor and five single bedrooms on the first floor, with communal bathrooms. The building also contains a large lounge and a dining area leading to the kitchen, and a laundry area. Patio doors lead from the dining room to spacious gardens, where there is also a summer house. An annex building provides fully self-contained accommodation for two further adults.

People’s experience of using this service:

• The service responded and went the extra mile to address people’s needs in relation to protected equality characteristics. For example, the service took extra steps to accommodate religious and cultural needs people living at White House.

• The service understood the needs of different people and groups of people, and delivered care and support in a way that met these needs and promoted equality.

• The service took innovative steps to meet people’s information and communication needs over and above complying with the Accessible Information Standard.

• People received individual, tailored care and support which led to exceptional outcomes. Care and support met people’s needs, and reflected their diversity, preferences and choices. Feedback from people and their family carers always reflected very responsive care and support.

• People were safe and staff knew how to keep them safe from harm. The provider had a recruitment process to ensure they had enough staff to support people safely. People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff followed infection control guidance and had access to personal protective equipment.

• Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. People's nutritional needs were met and they received enough to eat and drink to ensure they had a healthy diet. People accessed health care when needed.

• People received care and support in a caring environment which promoted their privacy, dignity and independence. The provider took steps to make sure people could be involved in decisions about their care and support.

• People's support needs were assessed regularly and planned to ensure they received the assistance they needed. People's support was individualised. People were supported to take part in a range of activities. People's interests, preferences, likes and dislikes were known to staff. The provider had a complaint process which people were aware of and were able to voice any concerns.

• The provider had systems in place to investigate and monitor accidents and incidents. The registered manager understood their legal requirements within the law to notify us of all incidents of concern, deaths and safeguarding alerts. The registered manager sought and shared knowledge and ideas, which contributed to improving the service and ensuring up-do-date best practice was followed.

Rating at last inspection: Rated Good overall (last report published 16/12/2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection to check that this service remained Good.

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

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