Archived: Wilford House

Updated 3 May 2019

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.

This inspection took place on 12 February 2019 and 15 February 2019 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors and a pharmacist inspector.

We used the information we held about the service to formulate our inspection plan. This included information relating to the last inspection of the service which took place on 08 February 2018.

We also reviewed other information we held about the service. This included statutory notifications that the provider had sent to us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. These include information about safeguarding concerns, serious injuries and deaths that had occurred at the service. We also considered feedback received from the local authority commissioners and safeguarding adults’ team about the services provided at Wilford House.

We spoke with nine people who used the service and one relative. We did this to gain people's views about the care and to check that standards of care were being met.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. We spoke with the registered manager and they were available on both days of the inspection.

We spoke with the deputy manager, a senior care staff member and three support staff. We observed how care staff interacted with people in communal areas and looked at two people’s care records.

We also looked at records relating to the management of the service. These included two staff files, training records and quality assurance records.

Updated 3 May 2019

The inspection took place on 12 January 2019 and 15 January 2019 and was unannounced.

Wilford House is a ‘care home’ located in Stafford. 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.

Wilford House accommodates up to 30 people in one building. At the time of this inspection there were 27 people using the service.

The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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 our last inspection of the service on 8 January 2018 we found the care of people did not always meet their needs and reflect their preferences, because the provider did not work collaboratively with the relevant person, or carry out an assessment of people’s needs. People were not always receiving safe care that met their preferences.

At the time of this inspection we found that the provider and registered manager had made significant improvement to make the home a safer place, to involve people in the planning and delivery of their care and to ensure systems were ion place to monitor and check the quality of the service.

Medicine management had required improvement previously and our findings at the time of this inspection identified an ongoing breach of Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 safe care and treatment. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

People felt that activities could be improved, however the registered manager could demonstrate they were looking to address this.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty at any one time to meet people's needs in a safe way. However, the increased needs of one person was impacting upon staffing levels and the registered manager was actively looking to address this issue before it impacted upon the quality of care for others living at the home.

Staff had been safely recruited to their roles. They received regular support and supervision. Staff felt well trained to carry out their role effectively and meet people’s individual needs.

There were systems in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection and environmental issues were being addressed to ensure risks were reduced further.

The provider followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported to have choice and control of their care and support. People’s decisions and choices were listened to and respected.

People's health and well-being was monitored and supported and needs were being met by staff and with the appropriate support from health professionals. People’s nutritional and dietary needs were catered for.

Staff were kind and respectful and they knew people well. People's privacy was respected and staff supported people to maintain their dignity. Staff had a good knowledge of people's needs. We received positive feedback regarding staff and how peoples’ needs were met.

Care plans were sufficiently detailed and person-centred, giving members of staff and external professionals relevant information when providing care to people who used the service. Plans were being reviewed to ensure the most up to date information was available. Information was reviewed and updated to ensure staff could deliver responsive support as people’s needs changed. Information was stored securely.

There were effective procedures in place to respond to any concerns or complaints. The registered manager responded promptly and effectively to concerns.

The registered manager was approachable and responsive. People were involved and consulted about the running of the home. People who used the service and their representatives were regularly asked for their views about their support through questionnaires and feedback forms. The registered manager also spent time observing care and support to enable them to gather views informally.

Quality assurance measures were now more effective and systems were in place to check the quality of the care delivered by senior staff, registered managers and senior managers within the organisation.

There were a number of effective management systems in place and these monitored the quality and safety of the service provided. Although some areas still required more in-depth monitoring (such as medicines management) the registered manager was knowledgeable of the service’s strengths and areas where ongoing improvements were required. They were acting upon these.

The registered manager was aware of the requirement to notify the commission of significant events and their quality rating was being displayed prominently within the home.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.