Archived: Wallfield

Updated 3 September 2014

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 regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process under Wave 1. The service was last inspected in July 2013. There were no concerns found at this inspection.

We visited the home on 7 May 2014. The inspection team included a lead inspector, an Expert by Experience, who had experience in services for people with a learning disability, a support person for the Expert by Experience and an observer from the Commission who was observing the lead inspector.

Before our inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the home. We asked the provider to complete an information return to help us decide what areas to focus on during our inspection.

On the day of our inspection, we spoke with five people living at the home, four members of care staff and the registered manager. We also spoke with one relative and two visiting professionals. We spent time observing how staff interacted and spoke with people who used the service. We looked at all areas of the building, including some people’s bedrooms (with their permission), We also spent time looking at records, which included people’s care records and records relating to the management of the home.

Updated 3 September 2014

Wallfield is a care home for up to 14 adults with learning disabilities.  Two beds are used for respite services and 12 for permanent placements. On the day of our inspection visit there were twelve people living at the home and no people receiving respite care. There was a registered manager in post who was present for part of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law like the provider. The registered manager is also referred to as ‘the manager’ throughout this report.

People told us they were happy living at the home and they felt the staff met their needs and were kind and caring. Staff knew people well and were able to communicate with people in a range of ways depending on people’s needs.

There were up to date and relevant care plans in place for people that reflected their individual needs. People were actively involved in care planning and in all decisions about their care. The home’s staff involved other professionals, families and advocates where appropriate. We saw that staff understood people’s care and support needs, were interactive, kind and friendly towards them and treated people with dignity and respect.

A range of activities were offered to people either in groups or on an individual basis. People were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the activities and were happy with the range of activities provided. Staff were skilled at communicating with people who used non-verbal forms of communication so they could interpret which activities people enjoyed and whether or not they wanted to join in or repeat activities.

We found that staffing levels were adequate to meet people’s needs and the manager had an effective system in place to plan this in advance.

The home was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People’s human rights were properly recognised, respected and promoted. Staff had a good understanding of mental capacity and consent and how this affected people who lived there.

There were suitable procedures in place to ensure that medicines were stored, handled and administered safely.

The home was well run and there was an open culture in the home. Staff and people living in the home said they could speak to the manager if they had any concerns and felt involved in the running of the home.