Archived: Waterside Grange

Updated 26 March 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by three inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type:

Waterside Grange is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. 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.

What we did:

Prior to the inspection visit we gathered information from a number of sources. We also looked at the information received about the service from notifications sent to the Care Quality Commission by the registered manager. We asked the provider to complete a provider information return [PIR]. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also spoke with other professionals supporting people at the service, to gain further information about the home.

We spoke with 13 people who used the service and 10 of their relatives. We spent time observing staff interacting with people. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We spoke with staff including care workers, nurses, the registered manager, cook, team leaders and the nominated individual for the service. We looked at documentation relating to three people who used the service, two staff files and information relating to the management of the service.

Updated 26 March 2019

About the service: Waterside Grange provides residential and nursing care for up to 83 people. Some people using the service were living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 75 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff we spoke with knew how to recognise abuse and how to report it. Risks associated with people’s care were identified and actions were taken to minimise risks occurring. From our observations we saw people’s needs were responded to in a timely way. However, it was not clear if adequate staffing levels were in place on Kirkstall unit. We raised this with the provider who informed us that a dependency tool was used to determine staffing numbers on all units and reassured us there were sufficient staff available. Medicines were managed in a safe way. People receiving medicines on an ‘as and when’ required basis had protocols in place to identify when they were required. However, some protocols had limited information. The provider was in the process of addressing this.

The service was clean and well maintained, minimising the risk of infection. We identified some areas which required attention and the registered manager took immediate action to address them. Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed to identify any trends and patterns. Action was taken to minimise repeated accidents and incidents.

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was delivered in line with people’s needs. Staff we spoke with told us they received appropriate training and support to carry out their roles and responsibilities. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. People told us they enjoyed their meals. People had access to healthcare professionals who were referred to in a timely way.

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.

We spent time observing staff interacting with people and found they were kind, caring and supported people in a sensitive way. Staff were very patient and gave people time and opportunities to remain independent.

Staff knew people well and supported them in line with their current needs and wishes. Staff ensured people received social stimulation in line with their interests. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s favourite flowers and colours and could engage in meaningful conversations. People and their relatives felt able to raise complaints and were confident that appropriate actions would be taken to address their concerns.

The service had a registered manager in place who was responsible for the day the day running of the service along with a management team. Audits were completed to ensure the service operated within the providers policies and procedures. People who used the service, their relatives and staff were given opportunities to be involved in the service and discuss their opinions about the home.

More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 13 August 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.