The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Nationwide Community Care Limited - 35 Mede Way

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

35 Mede Way, Wivenhoe, Colchester, Essex, CO7 9HW (01206) 828011

Provided and run by:
Nationwide Community Care Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Nationwide Community Care Limited - 35 Mede Way on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Nationwide Community Care Limited - 35 Mede Way, you can give feedback on this service.

22 January 2018

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 22 January 2018 and was unannounced. 35 Mede Way 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 provides accommodation and personal care for up to two people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection two people were receiving support at the service.

At our last inspection in January 2016 and we rated this service good. At this inspection we found that the service remained good.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This service was provided in line with the values that underpin the ‘Registering the Right Support’ and other best practice guidance. These values include supporting people with choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People using the service were supported to live as ordinary a life as any other citizen.

Staff understood the need to protect people from harm and the steps they should take if they suspected abuse. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to keep people safe and we saw that they look steps to protect people and reduce the likelihood of harm. Medicines were safely stored and there were clear systems in place to ensure that people received their medicines as prescribed.

There were sufficient numbers of staff available to keep people safe and meet their needs. The staff team was stable and they worked in a flexible way, according to people’s needs and preferences. Recruitment procedures were thorough and reduced the likelihood of the service employing individuals who were unsuitable to work in this type of service.

People were supported by staff who had been trained and were well motivated and supported. Staff had a good understanding of healthy eating and we saw that they sought advice appropriately from health professionals and followed their recommendations.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff had been provided with training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2015 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and understood the principles of consent and best interests. The MCA and DoLS ensure that, where people lack capacity to make decisions for themselves, decisions are made in their best interests according to a structured process.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and treated them with kindness. Care plans were person centred, detailed and informative. Daily recordings were undertaken along with handovers to ensure good communication and continuity of care.

People were supported to have a full life and maintain relationships with those important to them.

The manager provided strong leadership and was visible and accessible. Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the delivery of care and safety of the service. Actions were taken where areas for improvement were identified.

For a more comprehensive report regarding this service, please refer to the report of our last visit dated January 2016.

14 January 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 14 January 2016 and was unannounced.

The service provides residential care and support to two people with a learning disability.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff understood the need to protect people from harm and the steps they should take if they suspected abuse. Risk assessments were in place to guide staff how to manage risks and keep people safe from harm.

There were clear recruitment procedures in place which checked staff suitability to work in the service. There was a stable staff team who worked in a flexible way, according to people’s needs.

People were supported by staff who were clear about their responsibilities and were motivated and supported by management . Staff worked alongside other health professionals to meet people’s health needs. Staff had good relationships with the people they supported.

Staff had been provided with training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2015 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The MCA and DoLS ensure that, where people lack capacity to make decisions for themselves, decisions are made in their best interests according to a structured process

Care plans identified people’s particular preferences and choices and were regularly reviewed. People’s independence was promoted and they were supported to play an active part in their local community and follow their own interests and hobbies.

The manager was visible and accessible. Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the delivery and safety of the service.

10 January 2014

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we gathered evidence by speaking with people who use the service. Where people were unable to speak with us they communicated through gestures. People were able to tell us they enjoyed living at Mede Way and they appeared happy and relaxed.

We also spoke with staff and reviewed care records as well as staff records. We saw that staff understood people's needs and the care provided was person centred.

We reviewed the provision of food and drink, and people told us the food was good.

We examined recruitment processes to ensure these were providing staff suitable to perform their role. We also examined how staff were supported to fulfil their role and provide support to people.

We saw the environment was clean, homely, well maintained and met the needs of the people living there.

30 November 2012

During a routine inspection

We gathered evidence of people's experiences of the service by talking with people, observing how they spent their time and noting how they interacted with other people living in the home and with staff.

During our inspection we spoke with two people who told us they liked living at 35 Mede Way. We saw that people smiled and appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff and others living in the home.

During our inspection we saw that people received good care. One person living in the home told us they liked the food and the other said the home was lovely.