Archived: Wurel House

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People who used the service told us that they felt safe; staff knew people who used the service well. We saw that the risks associated with carrying out the care, support and treatment had been assessed and minimised. There was a plan in place to enable people's care to continue should a foreseeable emergency occur, for example a power failure.

We found that care files contained the information that protected people from the risk of receiving unsafe or inappropriate care or treatment. We found that people's records were being completed in such a way as to enable health issues to be followed up and to keep staff informed of a person's most up to date care needs.

Is the service effective?

People told us that they were happy with the care they received and felt their needs had been met. It was clear from what we saw and from speaking with staff that they understood people's care and support needs and that they knew them well. People we talked with were positive about their experiences of the service. During our inspection we talked with two people who used the service. People told us that the staff were caring. One person said 'The staff are very special people, they are very caring.' Another person said 'The staff are really caring, this is a nice house I feel safe here'. One relative commented that staff had been excellent at meeting people's needs.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers were patient and gave encouragement when supporting people. We saw that staff interacted positively with people who used the service. People we talked with about the service told us that staff were caring and friendly. We observed staff offering people choices. We talked with two people who used; they were happy with the care they had received.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. We saw that each person had a named key worker and that systems were in place that enabled care plans to be reviewed and updated. We observed that staff asked people for their views and permission before providing any care or treatment. Records confirmed people's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded. People had access to activities that were important to them and had been supported to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives.

Is the service well-led?

Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. We saw that people who used the service were asked for their feedback about the service they received. People had opportunities to participate in residents and key worker meetings. People could be confident they would be listened to if they complained. One person told us that 'I can go to any member of staff if I am unhappy, they will listen to me. There were audit processes in place to monitor risks, safety and wellbeing.

There were three people living in the home at the time or our inspection visit. People told us they were content living in this home and were satisfied with all aspects of the service. They said, " I like living here." "Staff are good." The service made sure people were offered choices about their care and treatment in ways they could understand. The atmosphere was calm and relaxed. We saw that people were comfortable with the manager and staff who were supporting them.

People were asked for their consent before any care or treatment was given.

People received care and support that was well planned and sensitively delivered.

People benefitted from the homely environment.

There were enough staff on duty at all times of the day and night to provide the support that people needed.

Effective quality assurance procedures ensured that people were provided with a good service.

Overall we found that this service was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led and had achieved compliance.

The provider has declared that in future Wurel House will ensure that all appropriate training both "in house" and external are conducted in a timely fashion to ensure compliance.