White Acres

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

People generally received support from staff who knew them well and lived in a homely environment. They had some choice over their day-to-day lives, and staff had received training in learning disability and autism. However, some ineffective leadership and systems meant the principles of Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture were not consistently upheld. Leaders had made some decisions on people’s behalf without appropriate consultation, which undermined people’s choice, control and involvement. Systems designed to communicate and support people’s individual needs were ineffective.

The registered manager was personable, knew people well and was observed engaging positively with people. Staff appeared engaged with people and were seen sitting with them, talking and taking part in activities. Staff spoke warmly about the people they supported. Comments included, “The residents are a joy to take care of,” and, “The residents really are the best thing, we wouldn’t be in the job without them and they are a good bunch.” We saw staff sit with people, talk with them and show genuine interest in what they were doing.

The provider’s systems and processes had not always ensured potential safeguarding concerns were identified, reviewed and reported without delay. The service did not always have a consistently effective approach to learning and improvement. Known issues were not always followed through, and most of the concerns identified during our inspection had not been identified or resolved by the service prior to the inspection.

People mostly received the right medicines at the right time, however some people had missed doses because medicines were out of stock. Although staff had received training in a range of areas, night staff had not been trained to administer medicines, which meant people could experience delays in receiving medicines overnight. The provider took immediate action during the inspection to address this concern.

Infection prevention and control practices, support for people with eating and drinking risks, and documentation relating to healthcare appointments, communication needs and distressed behaviours were not always effective. Governance systems had not identified and addressed all areas of concern, including compliance with some DoLS conditions, resulting in missed opportunities to improve outcomes for people. During the inspection, leaders were responsive to our feedback and demonstrated a commitment to making effective improvements.

The provider was in breach of legal regulations relating to the safe management of medicines, safeguarding and governance.