Archived: Wylye House

Updated 31 March 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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.

This inspection took place on 12 December 2014 and was unannounced. We returned on 16 December 2014 to complete the inspection.

The inspection was completed by two inspectors. Before the inspection we reviewed previous inspection reports and information we held about the home including the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form in which we ask the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also made note of notifications. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to send to us.

During our inspection we spoke with two staff members, three community professionals, the deputy manager and the manager. We spent time observing the way staff interacted with people who use the service and looked at the records relating to care and decision making for three people. We also looked at records about the management of the service. We spoke with one relative and two community professionals by telephone after the visit.

Updated 31 March 2015

We last inspected Wylye House in January 2014. At that inspection we found the provider to be in breach of Regulation 12. This meant people were not protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had not been followed. The provider wrote to us with an action plan of improvements that would be made. During this inspection we found the provider had taken steps to make the

Wylye House is a care home which provides accommodation and personal care for up to four people with a learning disability who may also have additional complex needs. There were three people living at the home at the time of our inspection. The home is a terraced house situated in a residential area of the city and comprises of accommodation over three floors.

The manager was not registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People who use the service were unable to tell us directly about their experience of the service, we observed people appeared calm and relaxed during our visit. Relatives told us “I think (my relative) is definitely safe, staff keep in regular contact with me”. Systems were in place to protect people from harm and abuse and staff knew how to follow them. Records we reviewed showed staff reported incidents to the manager, we found that we were not notified of these. Services are required as part of their registration to tell us about important events relating to the care they provide using a notification.This meant the appropriate authorities were not always notified of significant events.

People were protected from risks associated with their care because staff followed the appropriate guidance and procedures. People’s medicines were administered safely. The service had appropriate systems in place to ensure medicines were stored correctly and securely.

Staff knew the people they were supporting, relatives told us “staff have got to know (my relative) well and they look after him very well”. Staff spent time sitting with people and engaging in activities.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS are an amendment to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 which allow the use of restraint or restrictions but only if they are in the person’s best interest.We observed there was a disempowering approach to supporting people and staff were placing restrictions on people without following the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. There were no Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications made for two people living at the home where they were subject to continuous supervision and lacked the option to leave the home without staff supervision.

Staff received appropriate training to understand their role. Staff had completed training to ensure the care and support provided to people was safe. Staff received a comprehensive induction, supervision (one to one meetings with line managers) and training to support them to carry out their roles correctly.

We saw that people’s needs were identified and recorded in clear, individual plans. These were developed with input from the person and people who knew them well. Relatives were confident that they could raise concerns or complaints and they would be listened to. A complaint was made by a person who uses the service, this was acknowledged and investigated by the provider.

The provider and manager had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. The service had not kept up to date with current best practice and whilst the visions and values of the organisation were available within the home, the staff we spoke with were unable to tell us about them. The manager informed us at the time of our inspection there were plans in place to close the home in February 2015.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.