We carried out a review of the data available to us about Wanderers House 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 Wanderers House, you can give feedback on this service.
The property was clean, comfortable with plenty of room for people to live.
People told us they felt safe and happy and the service was their home. One person told us, "There are no problems here, I am happy.”
There were safeguarding systems and processes in places that sought to protect people from harm. Staff knew the signs of abuse and what to do if they suspected it. There were sufficient staff in place, all of whom had passed safe recruitment procedures to ensure they were suitable for their role. There were systems in place to monitor people's safety and promote their health and wellbeing, these included risk assessments and care plans. The provider ensured that when things went wrong, incidents and accidents were recorded and lessons were learned.
People needs were assessed in detail before moving into the home so the provider knew whether they could meet a person's needs. Staff were sufficiently skilled and experienced to fulfil their roles, received training and were supported through supervision and appraisal. People were prompted to eat and drink healthily and could choose what foods they wanted to eat. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People were treated kindly and compassionately by staff. People were supported to express their views and make decisions about the care and treatment they received. Staff respected people's privacy and dignity and supported them to be as independent as possible.
People received personalised care because their support needs and preferences were detailed in their care plans. People were supported to lead meaningful and fulfilled lives through activities of their choice. The provider had a complaints policy and process in place; people told us they would feel comfortable raising complaints. There were no people at the end of their life, but the provider worked with people to establish their wishes at such a time, so that they could support people if their health changed.
People and staff thought highly of the area manager and deputy manager. Staff knew their roles and understood what was expected of them. The area manager and deputy manager understood their responsibilities in the absence of the registered manager, to ensure people received a safe, high quality service. People and staff were engaged in the service and their opinions were sought. There were quality assurance systems in place to assist the provider to monitor and improve its care and treatment of people. The service had built local community links to benefit the lives of people using the service.
This service met characteristics of Good in all areas; More information is in the 'Detailed Findings' below.
Rating at last inspection: Good. The last report for Wanderers House was published in January 2016.
About the service: Wanderers House is a residential care home that provides personal care for up to seven people with learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection seven people lived at the home.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection that was scheduled to take place in line with Care Quality Commission scheduling guidelines for adult social care services.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service to ensure it meets its regulatory requirements
This inspection was unannounced and took place on 26 November 2015. At the last inspection in December 2013, we found the provider was meeting all of the requirements of the regulations we reviewed.
Wanderers House is registered to provide accommodation for up to seven people who require personal care and support. On the day of the inspection there were six people living at the home. There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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.
People told us they felt safe living at the home. Staff understood their responsibilities in keeping people safe from harm, and knew how to report any concerns. People and their relatives told us there were enough staff to support people living at the home, and that staff had the right level of skills and experience. Staff received training that was relevant to their role. The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and carried out appropriate checks on staff before they were able to start supporting people. People received their medicines as prescribed and at the correct times. Systems for recording medicines that were taken away from the home were not always robust.
People were asked to give consent before care was provided. People’s care and support was planned in a way that did not restrict their rights and freedom. Best interests meetings were held to ensure that decisions made were appropriate for the person involved. People were supported to have enough to eat and drink. Staff understood the importance of offering people meals that were appropriate for their dietary requirements or health needs. People were supported to maintain good health by staff that followed the advice given by healthcare professionals.
People and their relatives told us the staff were kind and caring. Staff understood people’s individual needs and people’s privacy and dignity was respected.
People were supported to take part in activities and go to places that interested them. People and their relatives felt confident to complain if they were unhappy and there was a system in place for handling complaints.
People told us they liked living at the home and relatives and staff told us they thought the home was well managed and felt they were listened to when they gave feedback to the registered manager or provider. There was an open culture at the home and people felt able to express their views and opinions. There were systems in place to manage the quality of the service and regular audits were carried out. Where feedback had been given by staff we saw that changes had been implemented to reflect this.
At the time of our inspection seven people lived at Wanderers House. During our inspection we spoke with five people who lived there, three staff, the registered manager and the registered provider.
Everyone we spoke with was complimentary about the overall service provided, their care and the staff. One person who lived there told us, 'I like it here'. Another person said, 'I am happy here'.
We saw that people's needs had been assessed by a range of health care professionals including specialist doctors and the optician. This meant that staff had enabled people to have their health care and safety needs monitored and met.
Staff had received training to help them recognise abuse and they were aware of who they should report to if they had a concern. One person told us, 'I feel safe here'.
Recruitment processes ensured that staff employed were suitable and safe to work with the people who lived there which protected them from harm and abuse.
We determined that staffing levels were adequate to ensure that people's needs were met and that they were safe. A person who lived there said, 'There are always enough staff to help us'.
We saw that systems were in place to monitor how the service had been run and people had been encouraged to give their views about the service provided. One person who lived there told us, 'The staff ask me things to make sure that I am happy'.
People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected. People expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their daily routines. One person said the 'Staff nice here'. We spoke with a visiting professional who told us that from their observations of staff they saw people were 'Given independence'.
People had regular contact with health professionals. This was documented in records and confirmed by people we spoke with. Two relatives said that 'I think my daughter is looked after well in the home' and 'The staff are very caring to my daughter'.
We spoke with people about foods they liked and these reflected what we saw recorded in their records. People told us they were able to make choices as to what food they had with staff. This meant that people had involvement in their food choices.
We spoke with two staff about how they were supported to do their jobs. One told us that the manager was approachable and 'If got any problem will see her and she will try and sort'.They said that the manager was always available 'On the end of a phone' and they could access advice and support when needed. Another staff said 'I feel that the manager gives all the relevant training needed that staff require'.
People felt able to share their views and raise any comments with staff and they told us there were aware of how to complain.
People told us that staff help them with the support they want and if they need something, then they just need to ask. In discussion with people or through observation, we saw that people's choices and support needs were reflected in their care plans. People told us and we saw that they are encouraged to be independent where possible. We saw people preparing their own meals. They also told us they clean their own rooms.
We saw that care plans were available in easy read formats and were supported by pictorial information that contained photos of the individual to whom they related. These photographs were of people having involvement in their day to day life.
People told us that their health care needs are met and when they are unwell they can see their GP. They also told us that they have routine checks with opticians, dentists and other health services as needed. We also heard how support is provided that reflects people's individual cultural needs in respect of hair and skin care.
People told us about their daily activities and these reflected what people like to do. Some people told us about daycentres and community based activities that they have participated in. A number of people told us about their pet rabbit and how they enjoyed looking after it.
We saw that people's assessments of their needs and risk had been updated monthly. Those we looked at reflected people's current support needs and identified risks that may be present.
People told us that staff listen to what they say and dealt with issues that may have arisen. Some people told us that they could raise concerns with staff, the manager and their families. One relative we spoke to said they were aware of whom to contact if they had concerns about people's safety. People told us they had no worries about anything, one saying that 'I'm safe, feels safe here'.
People told us about how they are involved in the running of the home and their choices are listened to. They told us how redecoration of their rooms was chosen by them. They also told us how changes within the service are discussed with them.
People have meetings to discuss developments; minutes of these were seen and signed by people. We also heard that people can speak to the managers or staff on a one to one basis should they wish.
People told us there were no restrictions and that they were able to decide what they wanted to do. We heard that some people are able to go out with support from staff as needed. People told us that their choices were promoted by staff. We saw that people moved around the house freely.
People told us that the home had a no restraint policy. We saw in people's behaviour plans that the response to behaviours was set out as a low key approach, with the intent of diverting people from what is upsetting them and then calming them down.
People we spoke to told us that they get their medication on time. They told us they consent to the staff managing their medication, one telling us that staff helped them as they are unable to manage their medication alone.
People we spoke to told us they understand why they take their medicine and said staff will talk to them about their tablets. Information about people's medication was detailed in their individual care plans.
People told us that they like and have confidence in the staff team at Wanderers House. People told us (that staff) 'They listen to me' and 'See staff as my friends'.