Wheatfield Drive

Wheatfield Drive is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and 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. Wheatfield Drive is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for a maximum of 3 people. The home specialises in providing care to people with learning disabilities and has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. At the time of our inspection there were three people living in the service, and it is arranged over two floors.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

At the last inspection on 17 July 2017, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements because Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications had not been made for people who needed support if they attempted to leave the service. At this inspection we found the service had made improvements and staff were following the principles of the MCA.

People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff were trained in how to identify and report concerns. Managers knew how to report concerns. Risks to people and the environment were assessed, and staff acted to reduce those risks identified. These risks were regularly reviewed. There were enough staff on shift to meet the needs of people, and those new to the service were recruited safely. Rotas were organised fairly. People received their medicines safely. Staff received training and had their competency checked. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection. We found the service to be clean and tidy. The registered manager took steps to ensure lessons were learned when things went wrong.

People had their care delivered in line with current legislation and best practice guidance. Training was provided to staff which was built around the needs of those using the service. People were involved in devising their own weekly menu and had choice and control over what and when they ate. Staff were trained to make sure food was handled safely. Staff followed the guidance from healthcare professionals. People had access to health care and treatment and staff supported people to understand what the treatment meant. Staff knew how to seek consent from people and were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice Best interest meetings were held when needed. Applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were sent to the local authority when required.

People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect. Staff knew people and their needs well, and had the time to listen to people express their feelings and views. Staff knew to refer to lay advocates if a person needed further support. People were encouraged to be independent. People had their privacy and dignity respected and promoted. People’s confidential information was kept private.

People were in control of how their support was provided, and support was provided in a personalised way. Each person had their own care plan which was regularly reviewed. People were supported to take part in activities of their choosing. People said they knew how to raise a complaint and would do so if they needed to. The registered provider was beginning to consider how they might support people at the end of their lives to have a dignified death by speaking to them about their preferences.

The registered manager had the skills and experience to lead the service. They had oversight of the daily culture in the service, which included the attitudes, performance and behaviour of staff. The culture was transparent and honest, and staff told us they felt valued and proud to work for the organisation. People, their families and staff were encouraged to be engaged and involved in the service. There were growing links with the local community.

The service had 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.

People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. Assessments and applications had not been made to deprive people of their liberty. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Peoples' health was monitored and referrals were made to health services in an appropriate and timely manner. Some conditions, such as epilepsy, could be managed more effectively with tailored support plans and risk assessments. We have made a recommendation about this in our report.

People were kept safe at Wheatfield Drive. Staff told us they understood the importance of people's safety and knew how to report any concerns. Risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing had been assessed and plans were in place, which instructed staff how to minimise any identified risks to keep people safe from harm or injury.

There were suitable arrangements in place for the safe storage, receipt and management of people’s medicines. Medicine profiles were in place which provided an overview of the individual’s prescribed medicine, the reason for administration, dosage and any side effects.

There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Staff knew people well and had built up good relationships with people. The registered provider had effective and safe recruitment procedures in place and staff told us that they had the training they needed to carry out their roles.

Staff treated people dignity and respect. Staff were knowledgeable about people's likes, dislikes, preferences and care needs. People’s privacy was respected by staff who valued people’s unique characters.

Staff were kind and caring: good interactions were seen throughout our inspection, such as staff sitting and talking with people as equals and treating them with dignity and respect. People could have visits from family and friends whenever they wanted.

People received a person centred service that enabled them to live active and meaningful lives in the way they wanted. There were a range of varied and meaningful activities that engaged people and gave people a sense of belonging in their community.

Complaints were used as a means of improving the service. People felt confident that they could make a complaint and that any concerns would be taken seriously.

There was an open, transparent culture and good communication within the staff team. The management team offered effective leadership to the service.

The registered manager took an active role within the service and led by example. There were clear lines of accountability and staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. The provider had systems in place to assess and audit the quality of the service.

The registered manager had notified us of events that had occurred within the service so that we could have awareness and oversight of these to ensure that appropriate actions had been taken.