We carried out a review of the data available to us about Wendleberrie 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 Wendleberrie House, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ Safe arrangements were in place for visitors to the service including health professionals, and relatives when it was safe to do so. This included a lateral flow device rapid test, temperature check, hand sanitisation, personal protective equipment (PPE) and a questionnaire.
¿ Posters were on display reminding people on the importance of regular hand washing / hand sanitisation, social distancing and the wearing of facemasks. These measures helped keep people using the service, staff and visitors stay safe.
¿ The environment was clean. Enhanced cleaning and disinfection took place throughout the home to reduce the risk of the spread of infection. This included regular cleaning of 'high touch' areas such as, light switches, call bells, door handles and handrails.
¿ Hand sanitiser stations were available throughout the service in communal and private areas of the home. PPE and laundry was safely disposed of in designated bins, which were located around the service. Staff were observed to wear PPE appropriately. All these measures reduce the risk of cross contamination to help keep people safe.
¿ In addition to routine infection control training all staff received specific training on reducing the risks of the transmission of the Coronavirus. Training included the importance of following good handwashing practices and the procedure for putting on and taking off (donning and doffing) personal protective equipment (PPE).
¿ There were sufficient stocks of PPE including government recommended face masks, face visors, disposable gloves, aprons and hand sanitiser.
¿ Social distancing was practiced by people using the service when using the communal areas of the home.
¿ Regular testing for COVID-19 was in place for staff and people using the service. This meant swift action could be taken if any positive results were received.
¿ A separate staff room was available outside of the main build for staff to change clothing at the start and end of their shifts and take their breaks. Staff practiced social distancing which helped keep everyone safe.
¿ Staff worked flexibly as a supportive team and were willing to work extra shifts when needed. This meant there was minimal use of agency staff. This helped to reduce the risk of infection spread and ensured consistent care for people living in the service.
¿ Infection prevention and control audits were undertaken regularly by the registered manager. This ensured they had effective oversight of all aspects of infection control within the service.
Wendleberrie House 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.
Wendleberrie House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care, without nursing care for up to 15 older people, including people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection, 10 people were using the service.
The registered provider was also the registered manager for the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 in February 2018, the service was rated ‘Requires Improvement’. At this inspection we found the provider was in the process of implementing more robust records management and quality audit systems. Some of the systems had recently been introduced and needed time to be embedded into practice. Therefore at this inspection we have rated ‘Well-Led’ as ‘Requires Improvement’ and the overall rating for the service has improved to ‘Good’.
People were protected from harm, the staff understood how to keep people safe and how to report any concerns regarding people’s safety or welfare. The service safely supported people with the administration of medicines. Safe recruitment procedures were generally carried out and there was sufficient staff available to meet the current needs of the people using the service.
Risk assessments addressed the potential risks present for each person and monitoring records were used to manage the risks. These were also used to recognise when specialist advice from other healthcare professionals needed to be sought in response to people’s changing needs.
Systems were in place to question accidents and incidents to learn from them and mitigate the risk of any repeat incidents. The provider had introduced systems to analyse these to identify areas for further improvement and to mitigate further risks.
The premises were clean and hygienic, and people and staff were protected from the risks of infections. Checks to the safety of the environmental took place and records were maintained on the checks.
People were provided with a choice of nutritious meals and people identified at risk of losing weight, or those with swallowing difficulties were referred to health professionals for specialist care and advice.
People’s needs were fully assessed before moving into the service, and people and relatives confirmed they were involved in the assessments. The service worked and communicated with other healthcare professionals, so that people received effective care and support when moving between different care services.
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.
The staff were kind, compassionate, and friendly. People were encouraged to express their views and make choices. The staff knew the people who used the service well and had built trusting relationships. There was a policy on confidentiality and information about people was shared only on a need to know basis. People’s confidential information was stored appropriately.
People’s physical, emotional and spiritual, needs were met. People were supported at the end of their life to have a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death and where possible people were able to remain at the home.
The service looked at ways to make sure people had access to the information they needed in a way they could understand it; to comply with the Accessible Information Standards. The Accessible Information Standards is a framework put in place from August 2016 making it a legal requirement for all providers to ensure people with a disability or sensory loss can access and understand information they are given.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) had been notified of events and incidents that occurred in the service in accordance with our statutory notifications.
The provider had on display the rating from the last inspection both in the service and on their website. It is a legal requirement the latest CQC inspection report rating is displayed at the service where a rating has been given. This is so people, visitors and those seeking information about the service can be informed of our judgments.
Wendleberrie House 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.
Wendleberrie House provides accommodation and personal care. The location is registered to provide care for up to 15 people including older people and people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection, 14 people were in residence at the home.
At our last inspection in March 2016, the service was rated overall as good. At this inspection, we found that improvements were required and the service was overall rated as requires improvement.
There was a registered manager in post who was also the registered provider. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.
Staff training and the induction process for new staff required strengthening to ensure that staff had the required skills to fulfil their role effectively. Recruitment practices required improving to ensure that thorough safe procedures were followed when recruiting new staff.
We made a recommendation about induction training for staff.
The processes in place for people to choose meals, drinks and snacks required enhancing to ensure that people were able to have choices and maintain their independence.
The systems and processes in place to assess, monitor and manage the risks relating to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service required strengthening. The audits in place required more detail to ensure they were effective.
People were safeguarded from harm as the provider had effective systems in place to prevent, recognise and report concerns to the relevant authorities. Staff knew how to recognise harm and were knowledgeable about the steps they should take if they were concerned that someone may be at risk.
Staff knew their responsibilities as defined by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and had applied that knowledge appropriately. Staff understood the importance of obtaining people's consent when supporting them with their daily living needs.
People experienced caring relationships with staff and good interaction was evident, as staff took time to listen and understand what people needed.
There were sufficient numbers of experienced staff that were supported to carry out their roles to meet the assessed needs of people living at the home. People's care and support needs were monitored and reviewed to ensure that care was provided in the way they needed. People or their representative had been involved in planning and reviewing their care and plans of care were in place to guide staff in delivering their care and support.
People's health and well-being was monitored by staff and they were supported to access health professionals in a timely manner when they needed to. People were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink to maintain a balanced diet.
People were supported to take their medicines as prescribed and maintain good health and had access to healthcare services when needed.
People's needs were met in line with their individual care plans and assessed needs. Staff took time to get to know people and ensured that people's care was tailored to their individual needs.
People and their relatives were confident that if they had any complaints they would be addressed and that any concerns they had would be listened to and acted upon.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.
The staff understood what constituted abuse and the safeguarding procedures to follow to report abuse both internally and externally. People were supported to take risks and make informed choices. Medicines were appropriately managed.
Staff were recruited following safe and robust procedures and there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff available to meet people’s assessed needs. Staff received training to ensure they were equipped with the skills and knowledge to support people using the service. Staff supervision systems were in place to ensure that staff had the opportunity to reflect on their work practice and plan their learning and development needs.
People’s consent was sought before staff provided their care. People who lacked capacity to make decisions were supported following the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People had a balanced and varied diet and their dietary needs were assessed and monitored. They had regular access to healthcare professionals and were supported to attend health appointments to ensure their health and well-being was maintained
Staff treated people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. Independence was promoted and people were enabled to make and maintain relationships which mattered to them. Individualised care plans were in place that reflected people’s needs and choices on how they wanted their care and support to be provided.
A programme of entertainment activities was provided for people using the service. People were supported to engage in their choice of social and leisure activities.
People and their representatives were encouraged to provide feedback on the service and suitable arrangements were in place to respond to any complaints.
The vision and values of the service were person-centred. People and their representatives were supported to be involved and in control of their care.
Management systems were in place to monitor the safety of the environment and the quality of the service. Plans were in hand to improve upon the recording of the monitoring checks to provider a more robust audit trail.
We saw that people's care plans were detailed and took account of their individual needs and how this would be supported. We saw that the provider took adequate steps to protect the people they cared for from harm. The provider had adequate checks which made sure the safety and comfort of the people they cared for were maintained and any problems quickly resolved.