Westmead Residential Care Home

Updated 3 March 2018

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.

This inspection took place on 05 and 23 January 2018 and was unannounced. We previously inspected this location in October 2015 when we rated the provider as Good in all areas and Good overall.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector. On 05 January 2018 an expert by experience joined us. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Their area of expertise was dementia care.

We reviewed the information we held about the provider. We also looked at information shared with us by the local authority commissioners. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services, which are paid for by the local authority. We looked at the statutory notifications the provider had sent to us. A statutory notification is information about important events that the provider is required to send to us by law.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. 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 used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experiences of people who could not talk with us.

To help us understand people’s experiences of the service provided we spent time talking with people. This was to see how people spent their time, how staff provided care and support and to establish what they thought about the service they received. We also spoke with relatives who were visiting the home at the time of our inspection.

We spoke with twelve people who lived at the home and seven relatives or friends of people either while they visited the home or on the telephone. We spoke with the registered manager, the regional manager and seven staff members including lead care staff, care staff, domestic and catering staff. We also spoke with one healthcare professional.

We looked at six people’s care records and other records relevant to some of these people’s support such as medicines records and daily records. We looked at quality assurance checks, meetings involving people and relatives, compliments and complaints and accident records.

Updated 3 March 2018

This inspection took place over a period of two days. Both visits were unannounced.

We previous inspected Westmead Residential Care Home on 20 October 2015 and rated the provider to be Good in all five questions and Good overall.

At this inspection, we found the service remained Good.

Westmead Residential Care Home 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.

Westmead accommodates a maximum of 35 older people in one adapted building. Care and support was provided for people on both the ground and first floor. On the first day of our inspection there were 31 people living at the home. Some people were living with dementia.

There was a registered manager working at the home at the time of our inspection. 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.

People felt safe living at the home. Staff were aware of the action needed if they were concerned about people and their safety at the home. Staff were aware of how to reduce risks to people’s care and used equipment safely to promote good care. People’s dependency levels were monitored to assess the number of staff required to meet people’s needs. Some people believed staffing levels to be low at times to care for people in their preferred way. People received their medicines as prescribed.

Electronic care plans were in place. The registered manager was aware improvements were needed to ensure information was available to senior staff for them to fully audit them and was working with programme designers to achieve this.

Risks of infection were reduced due to systems and practices in place. Accidents and incidents were reviewed to reduce the risk of reoccurrence and in order for lessons to be learnt to prevent further incidents.

People’s needs were assessed and known to staff before they moved into the home to ensure they could be met. Staff received training and were supported to assist them provide the care people required. There were some mixed comments regarding the food provided from people at the home and whether people enjoyed it. People received support with eating and drinking as required to meet their needs. People were assisted to received support and advice from healthcare professionals to help maintain their wellbeing.

People were supported to have a choice and control of their lives. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible.

People liked the staff that provided their care and support and were able to relax and spend time with them. Staff were aware of different means of communicating with people and ensured people received care and support in a dignified way. Staff had knowledge of people’s likes and dislikes as well as their personal life histories. Relatives were confident their family member would receive good end of life care.

People were able to spend time doing things they enjoyed doing and were able to participate in events at the home. People and their relatives were aware of how to raise complaints and were confident these would be addressed.

People, their relatives and staff were complimentary about the registered manager and the senior team. Management systems were in place to ensure checks were undertaken so people would receive quality care and support. People and staff felt listened and to and believed their opinions were taken into account.