The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Wentworth House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

8 Blantyre Road, Swinton, Manchester, Greater Manchester, M27 5ER (0161) 793 9090

Provided and run by:
Mrs Christine Belvedere & Mr Antonio Belvedere

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

29 October 2014

During a routine inspection

Wentworth House is a care home in the Swinton area of Salford, Greater Manchester. The home is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide personal care for up to 25 people. The home is located in a residential area and accommodation is provided over two floors.

We last visited the home on 25 June 2013 and found the home was meeting the requirements of the regulations, in all the areas we looked at.

Currently, there was no registered manager in place at the home and recruitment for this position was on going.  The previous manager had de-registered with CQC in September 2014. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

Although we saw that staff received regular supervision as part of their on going development, we saw no evidence of any appraisals taking within the last 12 months. We raised this with the proprietor who acknowledged this as something that needed to be improved upon.

Staff at the home had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). MCA and DoLS are laws protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves. There were no DoLS currently in place at the home, however staff knew the correct procedures to follow to ensure people’s rights were protected. Staff had received training in the MCA and DoLS which was recorded on the training matrix.

On the day of our inspection the staffing team consisted of the care manager, deputy manager, two care assistants, a domestic and the cook who worked in the kitchen. This was to provide care and support to 24 people. One member of staff had telephoned in sick on the day of our inspection and this was covered instantly by another carer.

Staff spoken with told us they felt supported by the care manager and understood the ethos and values of the home. They felt they could raise any issues and they would be dealt with.

There were systems in place to monitor and review accidents, incidents and complaints. The manager told us they monitored staff training using a training matrix, which identified when updates were required for staff.

We saw the home followed safe recruitment practices which meant people were kept safe as suitable staff were employed, and appropriate checks undertaken.

People’s care records showed their needs had been assessed and care records were regularly reviewed. However, it was unclear to us how feedback from people who lived at the home was used to improve the quality of service provided. Surveys had been sent out in June 2014, but were not analysed. We saw no evidence of any residents meetings taking place at the home. The proprietor told us people’s views were sought during ‘one to one’ sessions, however there were no records to confirm these took place.

People we spoke with and their relatives said they felt able to raise any concerns or complaints with staff and were confident they would be acted upon.

Leadership in the home was good. The care manager and deputy manager worked alongside staff overseeing the care given and provided support and guidance where needed.

25 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We looked at a sample of five care plans and found they were detailed and well organised. We saw that people's preferences had been recorded. A nutritional assessment had been carried out for each person. Where there was a risk of poor nutritional intake appropriate referrals were made to health care professionals.

We walked around the building and found all areas were clean and tidy with no unpleasant odours. People told us: "It is always nice and clean." "I have always found it to be clean." We saw that staff had access to personal protective equipment (PPE) such as gloves and aprons. Paper towels and liquid soaps were available in communal areas.

We looked at a sample of five staff recruitment files and saw that appropriate safety checks were carried out before new staff began work. This included a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check and an Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) Adult First check confirming that the person had not been barred from working with vulnerable people.

We saw that regular audits of management systems such as medication, falls and accidents were carried out on a weekly or monthly basis. The manager produced a report for the provider.

16 November 2012

During a routine inspection

During the inspection we spoke with nine people who use the service. Six of these people who use the service were able to provide verbal consent although this was not always documented. Some people using the service were unable to communicate well enough to give us their views. We spoke with two relatives who were visiting on the day of the inspection who told us that they were kept up to date with any changes to care or treatment and agreed with what was being provided to meet their relatives' needs.

The arrangements in place supported the delivery of care to people. People's needs were being addressed and any associated risks had been taken into account. Feedback from people using the service was positive and they spoke highly of the care and treatment they receive from staff.

Staff at the home felt supported in their job role and received appropriate training to help develop their skills. People using the service were happy with the way staff treated them and felt they were able to meet their needs.

There were appropriate systems in place to effectively monitor the quality of service being provided. New systems have also been introduced to further enhance this process going forward.

The home had an appropriate complaints procedure in place. People using the service and their relatives had not raised any complaints but they were aware of the process should they ever need to. People using the service felt that their complaint would be dealt with appropriately.

7 November 2011

During a routine inspection

People who use the service told us they were happy living in the home and that they were well looked after. Observation of service users demonstrated that they appeared happy and content, were treated with respect and dignity was well maintained. There was good interaction between staff and service users. People who use the service told us that they enjoyed the activities and found plenty to do such as playing cards or going out on trips with their friends and families.

Relatives that we spoke to told us that they always felt involved with everything that happens. They told us: 'Staff go out of their way, they know everyone's personal likes and dislikes and these are accounted for.'

They felt they were kept informed all the time and able to have their say in how their relatives were cared for. Relatives of people who use the service told us that they feel their relatives' needs were being well met. They were very happy with their relatives living in this home and would recommend it to others.

They felt that there is always something for the service users to do in the way of activities.

Relatives also told us that they felt able to raise concerns if they needed to and felt that any concerns or comments raised were dealt with appropriately.

Relatives expressed their satisfaction with the service and made such comments as:

'Excellent', 'they go the extra mile '.