The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Westside Home 1

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

32 Scarle Road, Wembley, Middlesex, HA0 4SN (020) 8782 1516

Provided and run by:
Mrs Kemi A Beckley and John Femi Beckley

All Inspections

22 September 2016

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This inspection took place on 22 September 2016, we initially planned to undertake a full comprehensive inspection, however during the inspection we spoke with the registered provider who advised us that they plan to close the service and move the two remaining people who used the service to their sister home in Kenton. We therefore changed this inspection to a focused inspection. We looked at two key questions during this focused inspection safe and responsive.

We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Westside Home 1 on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

During our comprehensive inspection on 2 October 2014 we rated the service overall 'Good'.

Westside Home 1 provides accommodation and personal care for three people with mental health needs. The home is located in the London Borough of Brent North West London and is a residential property over two floors. The home is used as a step down facility for people with mental health needs with the aim to support people into more independent accommodation. There is a registered manager in place. 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.

People who used the service told us that the service was safe and that they had been informed and consulted about the proposed closure. People had robust risk assessments and risk management plans which ensured risks were minimised.

Sufficient staff were deployed to meet peoples' needs and robust recruitment procedures ensured that people were protected from unsuitable staff.

Staff received training in the administration of medicines and robust medicines administration protocols ensured the safe administration of medicines.

People were involved in the planning of their care and were treated with dignity, privacy and respect. People’s needs had been assessed and regularly reviewed which ensured the service was meeting people’s needs.

02/10/2014

During a routine inspection

Our inspection on 2 October 2014 was unannounced.

The service met all of the regulations we inspected against at our last inspection on 18 July 2013.

Westside Home 1 provides accommodation and personal care for three people with mental health needs.. The home is located in the London Borough of Brent North West London and is a residential property over two floors. The home is used as a step down facility for people with mental health needs  with the aim to support people into more independent accommodation. There is a registered manager in place. 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 working in Westside Home 1 understood the needs of the people who used the service and we saw that care was provided with respect and compassion. People who used the service told us they were happy with their care. People had good access to health care professionals, which ensured their mental and physical health was regularly monitored and assessed.

Staff were appropriately trained and skilled and provided care in a safe environment. They all received a thorough induction when they started work and fully understood their roles and responsibilities, as well as the values and philosophy of the home.

The staff had also completed extensive training to ensure that the care provided to people was safe and effective to meet their needs.

Throughout our inspection we saw examples of good care that helped make Westside Home 1 a place where people felt included and consulted. People were involved in the planning of their care and were treated with dignity, privacy and respect.

The provider had employed skilled staff and took steps to make sure the care was based on local and national best practice.

The registered manager assessed and monitored the quality of care consistently. The provider encouraged feedback from people who used the service, care staff, relatives and outside professionals, which they used to make improvements to the service.

18 July 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

During our previous inspection on 02 May 2013 we found that care plans were of varied standards and quality, and were not reviewed when people's needs had changed. This meant that the registered provider had not taken proper steps to ensure that each person was protected against the risks of receiving care or treatment that was inappropriate or unsafe, through carrying out an assessment of need which informed the planning and delivery of care.

During our inspection on 18 July 2013 we found that the provider had addressed these issues and care plans had been updated and reviewed, which ensured that peoples changing needs could be met.

We also found during our inspection on 02 May 2013 that medicines were not stored appropriately, staff had not received appropriate training, and medication administration records (MAR) were not completed appropriately. This put people using the service at risk of being administered medicines inappropriately.

During our inspection on 18 July 2013 we found that all staff had received medicines training, MAR sheets were completed correctly and regular audits were carried out, this ensured that people using the service were protected from the inappropriate administration of medicines.

2 May 2013

During a routine inspection

People told us that they were involved in the treatment or care provided, comments included, "I meet my key worker regularly to discuss my care plan" and "we have regular meetings to discuss issues relating to the home and care received".

People were asked during their admission if they agreed with the restriction of having to return to the home at 10:00pm as part of their contract.

People told us that staff administered medicines. The systems in place and the procedures followed did however not ensure that people using the service were protected from unsafe practices.

People told us that staff knew what they were doing and appropriate training and supervision were provided.

Accurate and legible records were stored safely, this ensured only people authorised could access people's records.

9 May 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke to all three people using the service and asked them if they had opportunities which enabled them to contribute to the treatment or care provided. People told us that regular residents meetings were arranged where they had opportunities to tell staff and the provider if they were not happy about anything at the home. People also told us that they were treated with respect by staff and observations made during our inspection confirmed this.

We asked people using the service if they were involved in the care plan review process and if they were assessed by a senior member of staff prior to being admitted to the home. All people using the service spoken with confirmed their participation in the care plan review process. However evidence obtained and observations made during our inspection showed a lack of regular and robust care planning and risk assessment processes, which could put people using the service at risk and their needs not being met.

People using the service told us that they felt safe at the home and comments included, "they (staff) look after me very well, I am safer here then I was before".

Observations made during a tour of the property and comments made by people using the service, "it is ok to live here, but the place could be freshened up a little" demonstrated that some of the furnishing is dated and the paintwork could benefit from being updated.

We asked people if they were satisfied with the skill and experience of staff providing treatment or care, comments included, "they care for me well". Observations made during our inspection evidenced that the lack of regular staff supervisions may have an impact on the treatment or care provided to people using the service.