Warley House

Updated 17 April 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 was planned to check 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.

The inspection of Warley House took place on 5 February 2018 and was unannounced. One adult social care inspector carried out the inspection. Information had been gathered before the inspection from notifications sent to the Care Quality Commission (CQC). Notifications are when providers send us information about certain changes, events or incidents that occur. We also received feedback from local authorities that contracted services with Warley House and reviewed information from people who had contacted CQC to make their views known about the service. We received a ‘provider information return’ from the provider for this inspection. This is a form that asks them to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We spoke with eight people that used the service and two friends that were visiting. We observed some interactions between people and the staff. We spoke with the registered manager and two of the staff on duty. We looked at care files for three people that used the service and at recruitment files and training records for three staff. We viewed records and documentation relating to the running of the service, including those on quality assurance and monitoring, medication management and premises safety.

We also looked at equipment maintenance records and records held in respect of complaints and compliments. We looked around the premises and saw communal areas and people’s bedrooms, after asking their permission to do so.

Updated 17 April 2018

Warley House 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.

Warley House accommodates up to 39 older people, including those who may be living with dementia, across one adapted property. Communal accommodation is provided in a variety of lounge and dining areas and bedroom accommodation is provided in single rooms, some with en-suite facilities. The home is situated in a residential area on a main road and close to local amenities and bus routes into the centre of Scunthorpe. At the time of this inspection a service was being provided to twelve people.

At the last inspection in January 2017 the service met The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, but it was rated ‘Requires Improvement’. This was because there were issues with promoting respect, dignity and independence and effective audits, for which we issued recommendations.

This comprehensive inspection of Warley House took place on 5 February 2018 and was unannounced. We saw that improvements had been made in the activities offered to people and that medicine and environmental audits of the service were carried out more regularly. We found the overall rating for this service to be ‘Good’. The rating is based on an aggregation of the ratings awarded for all 5 key questions.

The registered provider was required to have a registered manager in post. On the day of the inspection we found that the registered manager had been in post for the past seven years. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 this inspection we found that the provider had addressed the recommendations with regard to promoting respect, privacy and independence and using audits more effectively to identify shortfalls in service delivery.

There were systems to safeguard people from harm and risks were reduced. The premises were safely maintained. Staffing levels and recruitment practices were safe and protected people. The management of medication was safely carried out.

People were supported by qualified and competent staff that received regular supervision. People’s mental capacity was assessed and their rights protected. The registered manager worked with other professionals and families to ensure decisions were made in people’s best interests where they lacked capacity. People’s nutrition and hydration were monitored. The premises were suitable for those living with dementia.

People received compassionate care from kind staff. People were supplied with the information they needed, involved in all aspects of their care and their consent was sought.

Person-centred care plans reflected people’s needs well and were regularly reviewed. People were supported to maintain friend and family connections and networks. An effective complaint procedure meant that complaints were investigated without bias.

The service was well-led. The culture and the management style of the service were positive. Satisfaction surveys and meetings aided the quality audit system so that improvements in service delivery were made. The registered manager maintained a status quo, but had not been proactive in seeking current best practice to enhance the service delivery in general and in looking to the future.

The recording systems used in the service protected people’s privacy and confidentiality as records were well maintained and securely held on the premises.