We carried out a review of the data available to us about Wellington Vale Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Wellington Vale Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
Systems were in place to help prevent people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infection.
All visitors were asked to complete a COVID-19 screening form on arrival, and had their temperature checked. Visitors had to undertake a lateral flow test on arrival or show proof of negative lateral flow test taken on the day of the visit, visiting professionals had to show proof of negative lateral flow test taken on the day of the visit; in addition, visiting professionals had to show proof of their COVID-19 vaccination.
Staff had worked as a team to help promote people's wellbeing throughout the pandemic. We observed positive interactions between staff and people.
Staff had guidance on COVID-19 and risk assessments, all staff took responsibility for the implementation of infection control measures.
The company installed ozone machines to filter air in communal areas, corridors and offices.
The front entrance had been fitted with automatic front doors opening by scanning people’s hands without needing to touch door handles.
Wellington Vale Care Home provides care and support for up to 80 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 24 people using the service.
The home was in the process of applying for the general manager to become the 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.
Before our inspection we received information of concern telling us Wellington Vale Care Home did not have sufficient staffing deployed to keep people safe. During our inspection we found this to be an accurate view and told the general manager and the provider's improvement was required. They acknowledged our findings and provided us with detailed examples of the work they had been doing to make improvements including the recruitment of additional staff.
The provider had systems in place to respond and manage safeguarding matters and make sure that safeguarding alerts were raised with other agencies.
People who were able to talk with us said that they felt safe in the home; and if they had any concerns they were confident these would be quickly addressed by the staff or manager
Assessments were in place to identify risks that may be involved when meeting people’s needs. Staff were aware of people’s individual risks and were able to tell us of the strategies in place to keep people safe.
Staff knew each person well and had a good knowledge of the needs of people, especially those people who were living with dementia.
Medicines were stored and administered safely. Clear and accurate medicines records were maintained. Training records showed that staff had completed training in a range of areas that reflected their job role.
Staff received supervision and appraisals were on-going, providing them with appropriate support to carry out their roles.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. At the time of our inspection applications had been submitted by the managing authority (care home) to the supervisory body (local authority) and had yet to be authorised. The manager understood when an application should be made and how to submit one.
Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions the home was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure any decisions were made in the person’s best interests.
The food menus offered variety and choice. They provided people with nutritious and a well-balanced diets. The chef prepared meals to meet people’s specialist dietary needs.
People were involved in their care planning, and staff supported people with health care appointments and visits from health care professionals. Care plans were amended to show any changes, and care plans were routinely reviewed to check they were up to date.
People were treated with kindness. Staff were patient and encouraged people to do what they could for themselves. Staff encouraged people to make their own choices.
People knew who to talk to if they had a complaint. Complaints were passed on to the manager and recorded to make sure prompt action was taken and lessons were learned which led to improvement in the service.
People’s needs were fully assessed with them before they moved to the home to make sure that staff could meet their needs. Assessments were reviewed with the person their relatives and where appropriate other health and social care professionals.
People were encouraged to take part in activities and leisure pursuits of their choice, and to go out into the community as they wished.
People spoke positively about the way the home was run. The management team and staff understood their respective roles and responsibilities. The general manager was approachable and understanding to both the people in the home and staff who supported them.
There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw that various audits had been undertaken.