Archived: Windsor House

Updated 1 February 2019

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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 16 January 2019. The inspection was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and one 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.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the previous inspection report and notifications about important events that had taken place in the service which the provider is required to tell us by law. We used this information to help us plan our inspection.

We spoke with one person’s relative. People did not engage verbally about their experiences of the service, we observed the interaction between people and staff in the communal areas.

We looked at four people's support plans and the recruitment records of two staff employed at the service since the last inspection. We viewed medicines management, complaints and compliments, meetings minutes, health and safety assessments, accidents and incidents logs. We looked at what actions the provider had taken to improve the quality of the service.

We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager and two other members of staff.

We sought feedback from relevant health and social care professionals and staff from the local authority on their experience of the service.

Updated 1 February 2019

This inspection took place on 16 January 2019 and was unannounced.

Windsor House is a residential care home for up to fourteen adults with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection there were eleven people living at the service.

Windsor House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The accommodation was spread over two floors of a converted house in a residential area. There was a large kitchen, a lounge and a dining room. People living at the service had a range of learning disabilities. Some people also required support with behaviours that challenged and physical disabilities.

At the last inspection the service was rated overall as requires improvement. In that we found that activities for profoundly disabled people required further development. And there had not been enough time for the new manager to embed improvements at the service. However, there were no breaches of the regulations. At this inspection we found that the service had improved, and the service is now rated Good.

The care service 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.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

Risks to people had been assessed. There was clear and detailed guidance for staff to enable them to minimise risks. People’s needs were appropriately assessed before they moved to the service. These assessments were used to plan people’s support. Medicines continued to be managed safely and people received their medicines on time and when they needed them.

There were systems in place to keep people safe and to protect people from potential abuse. Staff had undertaken training in safeguarding and understood how to identify and report concerns. Staff had regular discussions with people about their safety to protect them from the risk of abuse.

Staff knew how to keep people safe from the risks of infection and took the appropriate actions to do so. The service was clean and free from odour. The environment had been adapted to meet people’s individual needs and was personalised to reflect the people that lived there.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and support people effectively. Staff had the training, skills and knowledge they needed to support people with learning disabilities. Spot checks were carried out to monitor staff performance and staff had regular supervision meetings and annual appraisals. New staff had been recruited safely and pre-employment checks were carried out.

Peoples support was personalised to them and met their needs. There was information on people’s goals, preferences and their plans for the end of their life. Support plans were reviewed regularly and updated when their needs changed. People’s support records were complete and up to date and the registered manager regularly audited the service to identify where improvements were needed.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and were involved in decisions about their support.

People continued to be supported to maintain their health and wellbeing. Where people needed access to healthcare services, this was in place. When people needed to go to hospital there was information for people to take with them about their support needs so that hospital staff had access to this information.

People were treated with respect and kindness. Staff took the time to listen to people and understood how people preferred to communicate. People were supported to communicate their wishes and express their feelings. Privacy was respected, and levels of dignity were maintained. People were encouraged to do things for themselves and their independence was promoted. Staff supported people to maintain their relationships.

The registered manager continued to monitor the quality of service provided by seeking feedback from relatives and health and social care professionals. There was a complaints system in place if people or their relatives wished to complain. There were annual surveys of relatives, staff, professionals and people and feedback was positive.

Staff, relatives, community health and social care professionals told us the service had continued to improve. The registered manager had a clear vision and values for the service and there was an open culture. Staff and the registered manager understood their roles and responsibilities. The service worked in partnership with other agencies to develop and share best practice.