Welham House

Ratings

• Overall

  Inadequate

• Safe

  Inadequate

• Effective

  Requires improvement

• Caring

  Requires improvement

• Responsive

  Requires improvement

• Well-led

  Inadequate

Our view of the service

We carried out an assessment of this service between 18 June 2024 25 June 2024, we carried out an unannounced visit to the service on 19 June 2024. This assessment was carried out as we received concerns about the provider of this location. Welham House is a residential home, for up to 13 people. At the time of our assessment 10 people were using the service. The home specialises in the care of adults under the age of 65 with a learning disability and or autistic people. Medicines were not safely managed. People did not always feel safe at the service. We found people were not always protected from the risk of abuse and improper treatment. There were significant shortfalls in the governance and management oversight of Welham House. We found 7 breaches of regulation at the assessment of this service, in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment, person centred care, dignity and respect, premises and the governance of the service. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.

People's experience of this service

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it. We found people and their relatives were not always happy with the care and support they received. We identified people were not always receiving the best standard of care and areas of significant shortfalls were identified. We found risks were not identified, managed or monitored to ensure people were safe and protected from harm. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests.