White Acres

Updated 12 February 2022

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of COVID-19, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice is safe and that services are compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 21 January 2022 and was unannounced.

Updated 12 February 2022

White Acres 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. White Acres is registered to accommodate 12 people with learning disabilities; at the time of our inspection there were 12 people living in the home.

At the last inspection in January 2017, this service was rated as requires improvement. A breach of legal requirements was found. The provider was asked to provide an action plan to tell us what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to a breach in Good governance. At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made and sustained and the service was rated overall good.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Improvements had been made to the premises in order to meet people's needs and ensure the environment was clean and well decorated. There was a plan for refurbishment and continued improvements to the environment.

People received care from staff that knew them and were kind, compassionate and respectful. There were sufficient staff to provide the care and support people required.

People’s needs were assessed prior to moving into home, care plans based on their individual needs and preferences were in place and were kept under review. Risks to people had been identified and measures put in place to mitigate any risk. The premises were maintained to support people to stay safe.

There were appropriate recruitment processes in place and people felt safe in the home. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from any risk or harm and knew how to respond if they had any concerns.

Permanent staff were supported through regular supervisions and undertook training, which helped them to understand the needs of the people they were supporting. Staff who did not work at the service regularly had not attended training to update their skills and knowledge. People and where appropriate their relatives were involved in decisions about the way in which their care and support was provided.

Systems were in place to ensure the premises were kept clean and hygienic so people were protected by the prevention and control of infection. There were arrangements in place to make sure action was taken and lessons learned when things went wrong, to improve safety across the service.

Staff understood the need to undertake specific assessments where people lacked capacity to consent to their care and / or their day-to-day routines. However, these had not always been completed for a specific decision. They did not always include information about how the person had been supported to make their own decision. People’s health care and nutritional needs were carefully considered and relevant health care professionals were appropriately involved in people’s care.

People were cared for by staff who were respectful of their dignity and who demonstrated an understanding of each person’s needs. Relatives spoke positively about the care their relative received and felt that they could approach management and staff to discuss any issues or concerns they had.

There were comprehensive systems in place to monitor the quality and standard of the home. Regular audits were undertaken and any shortfalls addressed.

The registered manager was approachable and people felt confident that any issues or concerns raised would be addressed and appropriate action taken.

The service strived to remain up to date with legislation and best practice and worked with outside agencies to continuously look at ways to improve the experience for people.