Wistaston House

People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Staff respected privacy and dignity and supported people as individuals.

“People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who were knowledgeable about their support needs.” from the report

People were encouraged to make choices, prepare food, complete household tasks and use the community as independently as possible.

“People were encouraged to have choice and control of their lives.” from the report

Inspectors saw positive relationships between staff and people. Relatives said staff helped people keep regular contact with them.

“Relatives were complimentary regarding the service and support given to people.” from the report

Recruitment checks were robust. Staff completed induction and training, including improvements in autism training since the previous inspection.

“Recruitment processes were robust. Checks were carried out to ensure suitable staff were employed.” from the report

The new manager had introduced an electronic system and had begun making improvements. Staff and people gave positive feedback about changes since the manager started.

“The provider had implemented an electronic management system to support improvement to support plans, record keeping and governance.” from the report

Medicine administration records were incomplete or incorrect, and routine checks had not always found the problems. The medicines room was above 28°C, which put medicines at risk of becoming unsafe.

“Medicines were not always managed safely.” from the report

Some risk assessments and positive behaviour support plans did not reflect changes in people's needs. This meant staff did not always have current guidance.

“This meant that staff did not have up to date guidance on how to appropriately and safely support the person.” from the report

Weekly and monthly fire and property safety checks were not consistently recorded. The provider's audits had not identified all the problems found by inspectors.

“Checks relating to fire and safety of the property were not robust.” from the report

Communication needs were not consistently recorded in support plans. The CQC recommended that the manager review and update these plans.

“This meant that newer staff did not have the guidance they needed to effectively communicate with a person.” from the report

Capacity assessments and best-interest decisions did not always follow the Mental Capacity Act principles. Records did not always show advocacy or family involvement.

“Capacity assessments and best interest decisions did not always follow the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.” from the report