Warwick House

Updated 14 August 2018

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.

The inspection visit took place on 12 July 2018 and was conducted by one inspector.

It was a comprehensive, announced inspection. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location is a small care home for people with mental health needs who are often out during the day; we needed to be sure that someone would be in to talk with us.

This was the first time Warwick House had been inspected since registering with the Care Quality Commission in August 2017.

Before our visit we reviewed the information, we held about the home. We looked to see if the home had sent us any statutory notifications and we contacted health and local authority commissioners. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services for people and fund the care provided. They did not share any concerns about the service.

We reviewed information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require provider’s to send us at least once annually to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. During our visit found the PIR was an accurate reflection of how the home operated.

People living at the home were able to tell us from their own experiences, what it was like living at Warwick House. During our visit we spoke with two people, two care staff and the registered manager. We also spoke, briefly, with the provider via the telephone.

We looked at two people's care records and other records related to people’s care, including daily logs of care provided and medicine records. This was to see how people were cared for and supported and to assess whether people’s care delivery matched their records. We reviewed three staff files to check staff were recruited safely and were trained to deliver the care and support people required. We also looked at records of the checks the provider and registered manager made to assure themselves people received a good quality service.

Updated 14 August 2018

This inspection site visit took place on 12 July 2018 and was announced.

This was the first inspection of Warwick House since registering with the Care Quality Commission in August 2017.

Warwick 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.

The home provides accommodation with personal care for up to eight women with mental health needs. It does not provide nursing care. At the time of our visit five people lived at the home. The accommodation is provided in a large three story detached house in a residential area and has access to local shops and amenities. The home is located in Earlsdon, Coventry, in the West Midlands.

The home had a registered manager. 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 felt safe living at the home. The provider’s staff recruitment systems reduced the risk of recruiting unsuitable staff. There were enough staff available to provide the care and support people needed and to keep them safe.

The registered manager and staff understood how to protect people from abuse and their responsibilities to report any concerns. Staff received an induction into the organisation, and a programme of training to support them in meeting people's needs effectively. Staff were supported through individual and team meetings with the management team.

Risks to people’s safety were identified and staff provided good support to reduce identified risks although actions to reduce some risks were not always taken in a timely manner. This was being addressed. Information in care records mostly ensured staff had the guidance needed to ensure care and support was provided in line with people’s individual needs, life style choices, preferences and goals. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care.

People were encouraged to make day to day choices, including how they would like to spend their time. Management and staff worked with other professionals to support people to maintain their well-being, physical and mental health. Staff supported people to make healthy lifestyle choices and maintain a balanced diet.

The management team completed audit checks to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided. However, these were not always effective in identifying areas needing improvement. People, staff and relatives were invited to share their views about the home to drive forward improvements. An action plan was being developed to show how feedback was used to support continuous improvement.

The registered manager understood their responsibility to comply with the relevant requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff gained people’s consent before they supported people and respected people’s decisions and choices.

Care was delivered in a way which responded to people’s needs and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff understood the importance of supporting people to maintain, develop and regain their independence.

People received their care and support from staff they knew, who understood their needs, and with whom they had built relationships. The management and administration of medicine required improvement.

People spoke positively about the quality of care provided and the way the home was managed. Staff enjoyed working at the home and felt supported and valued by the registered manager. People knew how to make a complaint and were confident any concerns raised would be addressed.