Waterbury House

Updated 16 February 2019

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 07 January 2019 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of an inspector 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.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the PIR and other information we had about the service including statutory notifications. Notifications are information about specific events that the service is legally required to send us.

At the last inspection in October 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Some people at the service may not be able to tell us about their experiences. We used a number of different methods such as undertaking observations to help us understand people’s experiences of the home. Due to the complexity of the people who live at Waterbury House most were not able to verbally communicate so we used observation of interaction with staff with five people in the lounges, kitchen, dining areas and throughout the service.

During the inspection we spoke with two people living at the home, three relatives and five staff members, this included senior staff, and the registered manager. We reviewed two people’s care and support records and four staff files. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service such as incident and accident records, meeting minutes, recruitment and training records, policies, audits and complaints.

Updated 16 February 2019

The inspection tookplace on 07 January 2019 and was unannounced.

Waterbury House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Waterbury House accommodates nine people in a flat, a cottage and an adapted building. The flat and cottage are single-person accommodation. At the time of our inspection there were eight people living at the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

There was a registered manager at the service. ‘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.’

We observed warm and friendly interactions between people living at the service and staff. People were supported to maximise their independence in an environment which encouraged positive risk-taking. The staff team were passionate about promoting people’s choice and independence. Staff were encouraged to think creatively about how to improve people’s access to activities and the community. Staff discussed people’s achievements with pride.

The staff team were thoughtful and creative about increasing opportunities for people. They were supported in this by the management team who had an ethos of empowering staff. Staff were trained and supervised and where needed received additional training to improve their understanding of people’s care needs.

People felt safe and at home in the service. We observed good communication between people and staff, with staff quick to intervene when needed. The environment was safe, with any potential risks identified and managed.

People were able to maintain family contact and visitors were welcome at the service at any time.

People received their medicines safely; where possible people administered their own medicines with help. Staff were proactive about people’s health needs and worked with health professionals to enable people to access health care.

People received individualised care which respected their preferences. The service had increased the range and frequency of people’s activities and this had reduced the number of incidents of behaviour which challenged.

There was strong and effective leadership at the service. Staff were very positive about their job, the managers of the service and the quality of care they delivered.