Wellington and Longforth House is a residential care home with two distinct units. Wellington House provides accommodation to older people with dementia and mental health needs. Longforth House provides accommodation to people with a range of mental health needs.

Wellington and Longforth House provides accommodation to up to 43 people. At the time of the inspection there were 24 people living in Wellington House and 11 people living in Longforth House.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good:

People remained safe at the home. People told us there were adequate numbers of suitable staff to meet their needs and to spend time socialising with them. Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People received their medicines safely.

People continued to receive effective care because staff had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. People’s healthcare needs were monitored by the staff and people said they had access to healthcare professionals according to their individual needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The home continued to provide a caring service to people. People told us, and we observed, that staff were kind and patient. A visitor told us “I am very happy with everything. There is definitely no lack of care here.” People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received.

The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Care and support was personalised to each person which ensured they were able to make choices about their day to day lives. Complaints were fully investigated and responded to.

The service continued to be well led. People told us the management team were open and approachable. The registered manager and provider sought people’s views to make sure people were at the heart of any changes within the home. One person told us “They [registered manager] come to see if I’m ok and if there’s anything I want to talk about. He’s very easy to talk to.” The registered manager and provider had monitoring systems which enabled them to identify good practices and areas of improvement.

Wellington and Longforth House is a residential care home with two distinct units. Wellington House provides accommodation to older people with dementia and mental health needs. Longforth House provides accommodation to people with a range of mental health needs.

Wellington and Longforth House provides accommodation to up to 43 people. At the time of the inspection there were 24 people living in Wellington House and 11 people living in Longforth House.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good:

People remained safe at the home. People told us there were adequate numbers of suitable staff to meet their needs and to spend time socialising with them. Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People received their medicines safely.

People continued to receive effective care because staff had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. People’s healthcare needs were monitored by the staff and people said they had access to healthcare professionals according to their individual needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The home continued to provide a caring service to people. People told us, and we observed, that staff were kind and patient. A visitor told us “I am very happy with everything. There is definitely no lack of care here.” People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received.

The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Care and support was personalised to each person which ensured they were able to make choices about their day to day lives. Complaints were fully investigated and responded to.

The service continued to be well led. People told us the management team were open and approachable. The registered manager and provider sought people’s views to make sure people were at the heart of any changes within the home. One person told us “They [registered manager] come to see if I’m ok and if there’s anything I want to talk about. He’s very easy to talk to.” The registered manager and provider had monitoring systems which enabled them to identify good practices and areas of improvement.

This was a planned inspection to check that the required improvements had been made following the previous inspection in March 2013. At that visit, we found improvements were needed with regard to consent, medicines management and how the service recorded complaints. At this inspection we found the provider had rectified the concerns and the service was compliant in these areas.

We reviewed six care records and other records for the management and administration of the service. We spoke with eight people who used the service, one person visiting the service and the staff on duty. We observed how care and support was provided to people. We looked at the environment of the home and whether it met the needs of the people who lived there.

We spoke with people living in the Longforth unit of the home about the care and support they had. People said they were, “Very pleased”, “It’s fantastic” and “It’s lovely.”

The people we spoke with told us they were able to tell staff if they were unhappy or had any concerns or worries. They told us they found staff, “Easy to talk to and very approachable.” Some people expressed great confidence in some individual staff.” I can always speak to X and it gets sorted straight away.”

The people we spoke with told us they liked their rooms and enjoyed the communal areas of the home. One person told us they found the Longforth unit, “friendly and comfortable.”

There were 34 people living at the home at the time of the inspection. We spoke to six people living at the home and four people’s relatives to get their views on the care provided.

Everyone we spoke to made various positive comments about the home. One person told us “it’s very nice, very pleasant”. One relative told us “it’s first class, ten out of ten”. Another relative told us “(person) seems happy there”.

Relatives told us they felt well informed about the person's care. We saw one instance where the person's consent was not sought before staff acted and clear guidance was not in place around consent and capacity.

We observed care being delivered in line with people's individual care plans and people told us about the various ways staff met their needs. One person told us “staff help me to have a shower and go to bed”.

People we asked told us they received their medications at the right times. We witnessed medicines not being kept safely during medicine rounds.

People told us staff were “very good”, “ok”, “brilliant” and one person told us staff “have a good interest in me”. We observed that there were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

People told us they knew how to make a complaint and relatives told us they felt their comments were listened to. One person told us “if I had a complaint I know who to talk to, it’s two way”. However we found that there was no clear administrative complaints system in place.

Wellington and Longforth House is made up of two distinct areas. Wellington House cares for older people who have a dementia and Longforth House provides care to a group of younger adults who have a dementia or other mental health difficulty.

Many of the people who lived at the home were unable to fully express their views so much of the inspection was based on observing care practices and talking with staff.

Everyone we asked said that they were happy with the care that they received. One person said “They look after you well” and another said “It’s all pretty good.” One person who had recently moved to the home said “It feels better as days go by, they have a real willingness to please.”

Throughout our visit we observed that there was a calm relaxed atmosphere in the home and staff interacted with people in a kind manner.

People living at the home were all clean and well dressed. We were told that a hairdresser visited the home every week but on the day of our visit many people were not well groomed and may have benefited from extra support with washing and brushing their hair.

We spoke to one person in their personal room and noted that they did not have access to a call bell or drinks. This was raised with staff who immediately rectified the situation.

We observed that staff offered people choices in line with their abilities. We saw that people were able to move freely around their part of the home and were able to choose where they spent their time. Some people preferred to spend time in their personal rooms whist others used the communal areas.

There were choices for meals and we saw that some people made their requests before the meal and others were able to choose between two meals shown to them at the time. At the time of our visit the home was in the process of being refurbished and we saw that they had obtained fabric and paper samples to assist people to choose colour schemes for their bedrooms.

People who were able to express an opinion said that they felt “very safe.” One person said “I would go to the staff if I was unhappy about anything.” Another person commented “It’s cosy and safe here.”

We were told that personal and professional visitors were made welcome and did not have to notify the home in advance. One person said “Friends and family can come anytime.”

Staff seen during the visit were competent and well motivated. Staff demonstrated patience and kindness in their interactions with people living at the home. There was a very stable staff team, many of whom had worked at the home for several years. This ensured that people received care and support from staff who were familiar to them and had a good knowledge of their individual needs.

Comments about staff included “Staff are really great,” “They are all pretty good” and “Staff are not too bad, they look after you well.”