Wickmeads

Updated 7 March 2020

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

On the first day of the inspection, the inspection was carried out by one CQC inspector, a specialist nurse advisor 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. On the second day of the inspection, one CQC inspector and an assistant CQC inspector carried out the inspection.

Service and service type

Wickmeads 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. This service did not provide nursing care.

The service had a manager that was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission. This means that once registered, 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

The inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service and reviewed the provider information return the provider had completed. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We reviewed information about incidents the provider had notified us of. We also looked at the notifications we had received for this service. Notifications are information about important events the service is required to send us by law. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 15 people who used the service, four visiting relatives, a health professional, and a visiting GP, to ask about their experience of the care provided. We also spoke with fifteen members of staff which included the acting manager, the operations manager, the deputy manager, care team leaders and care staff, activity staff, housekeeping staff and the assistant Chef. During our inspection we observed care practices and the interaction between staff and people.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We reviewed a range of records that included five people’s support and care plans, daily monitoring charts and medicines records. We also looked at a range of records relating to the management and monitoring of the service. These included staffing rotas, staff recruitment records, staff supervision and training records, premises maintenance records, accident and incident records, meeting minutes, quality assurance records and a range of the provider's audits, policies and procedures.

Updated 7 March 2020

About the service:

Wickmeads is a care home without nursing registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 50 people. At the time of our inspection 41 people were living there.

People’s experience of using this service:

People told us they felt safe. They were relaxed and familiar with the staff and each other. People were cared for by a staff team who had received appropriate training to carry out their roles. Staff spoke knowledgably about the systems in place to safeguard people from abuse.

People’s medicines were managed safely, stored securely and administered by trained staff. People received assistance to take their medicines as prescribed. We have made a recommendation around the management and recording of people's medicines and prescribed topical creams.

The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. However, we have made a recommendation regarding the management of people’s Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards conditions.

Risks to people’s health, safety and well-being were regularly assessed, reviewed and updated.

The provider had robust recruitment systems to ensure staff were safely recruited. Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals to ensure they were fully supported in their role. There was an effective training programme that staff felt was interesting and well delivered.

Staff felt well supported in their roles and found the management team open, honest and approachable.

People’s health care needs were met, and staff supported them to see healthcare professionals when appropriate.

People’s dietary needs and preferences were assessed and where needed, people received support to eat and drink. This was provided in a discreet and friendly way. The dining rooms were attractively laid out to ensure people could have an enjoyable meal time experience.

People received care from staff that knew them well and treated them with kindness, compassion, respect and dignity. People's care was tailored to their individual needs and maintained their independence as much as possible. Care plans were detailed, person centred and reviewed regularly to ensure they reflected people’s needs.

The service had an activity programme for people to enjoy if they wished. Activities included outings to places of interest, and towns as well as indoor activities. People had one-to-one support to take part in activities to prevent social isolation.

People and their relatives knew how to complain and were confident their views would be heard.

There was a system of ongoing monitoring through audits and spot checks to review the quality of the service provided.

People, relatives, staff and health professionals expressed confidence in the management team and felt the service had a clear management structure and an open and supportive culture.

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

Rating at last inspection:

The last rating for this service was good (report published in August 2017).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating from the last inspection.

Follow up:

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