Whitehaven

Updated 10 September 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Whitehaven is a ‘care home’. 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.

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.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with nine people who used the service and two relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with four members of staff including the registered manager, assistant manager, senior care workers, and care workers.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and seven people’s medication records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including audits, policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We looked at training data and staffing rotas. We spoke with one professional who regularly visited the service.

Updated 10 September 2019

About the service

Whitehaven is a residential care home providing personal care to 11 people with learning disabilities at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 11 people.

People lived in a large residential building in a quiet street in Bognor Regis, near local shops and transport links. There was an accessible garden and people had their own rooms.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 11 people. Eleven people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people. Of the 11 bedrooms, there were two independent flats that people lived in attached to the home, along with nine bedrooms, which reduced the feel of a large institutional building.

The service had not been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. However, people using the service received planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that was appropriate and inclusive for them and the building had been adapted to reduce the impact of a larger building.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were safe at Whitehaven and told us they felt safe and well cared for. People were protected from the risks of abuse and other risks had mitigated. People received their medicines when they needed them, and the service was clean and tidy. There were enough staff to keep people safe.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff were well trained, supervised and supported in their role. People told us that they liked the food and had enough to eat and drink. People’s health needs were well supported, and the building was suitable to meet people’s needs.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and people told us they liked the staff. People were supported to have a voice and make decision about their own care. Staff ensured people were as independent as they could be and respected people’s privacy.

Whitehaven provided a person-centred service and people enjoyed a range of activities. People were supported with their communication needs by staff that knew them well. People knew how to complain, and staff were trained to support people at the end of their lives.

The registered manager was a visible presence who provided leadership to the service. Staff spoke highly of the manager One staff said, “The manager is the best here so far, she likes to get involved and talk and makes people laugh. You can always go to her and if its work or personal problem she finds time.”

Quality audits had been effective in identifying shortfalls and putting them right through action plans. People and staff were involved in the running of the service and people’s information was being shared safely.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 16 December 2016).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.