Archived: Woodlands

Updated 25 April 2017

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 21 March 2017 and was unannounced. This meant that the service was not expecting us. The inspection team consisted of one Adult Social Care inspector.

At the inspection we spoke with three people who used the service, three relatives, the registered manager, and three care staff.

Before we visited the service we checked the information we held about this location and the service provider, for example we looked at the inspection history, provider information report, safeguarding notifications and complaints. We also contacted professionals involved in caring for people who used the service; including; the local authority commissioners.

Prior to the inspection we contacted the local Healthwatch who is the local consumer champion for health and social care services. They gave consumers a voice by collecting their views, concerns and compliments through their engagement work.

During our inspection we observed how the staff interacted with people who used the service and with each other. We spent time watching what was going on in the service to see whether people had positive experiences. This included looking at the support that was given by the staff, by observing practices and interactions between staff and people who used the service.

We also reviewed records including; four staff recruitment files, medication records, safety certificates, four care plans and records, four staff training records and other records relating to the management of the service such as audits, surveys, minutes of meetings and policies.

Updated 25 April 2017

The inspection took place on 21 March 2017. The inspection was unannounced.

The Woodlands is a residential care home based in Stockton. The home provides personal care for people with learning disabilities. It is situated close to the local town centre, amenities and transport links. The service is registered to provide support to ten people and on the day of our inspection there were nine people using the service.

The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 last inspected the service in November 2014 and rated the service as ‘Good.’ At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’ and met all the fundamental standards we inspected against.

The atmosphere of the service was homely with a feel that was warm and welcoming. People who used the service were relaxed in their home environment and relatives who we spoke with told us they felt the service had a homely feel.

We saw staff interacting with people in a person centred and caring way. Person centred is when the person is central to their support and their preferences respected. We spent time observing the support that took place in the service. We saw that people were always respected by staff and treated with kindness. We saw staff being considerate and communicating with people well.

People were supported to maintain their independence as much as possible.

We saw that people were encouraged to enhance their wellbeing on a daily basis by taking part in activities at home and in the community that encouraged and maximised their independence and also contributed positively to the homely atmosphere.

We spoke with care staff who told us they felt well supported and that the registered manager was approachable.

Throughout the day we saw that people who used the service and staff were comfortable, relaxed and had an extremely positive rapport with the registered manager and also with each other.

From looking at people’s care plans we saw they were written in plain English and in a person centred way and they also included a ‘one page profile’ that made use of, personal history and described individuals care, treatment and support needs. These were regularly reviewed; and family members and people were included in the process.

Care plans contained risk assessments. These identified risks and described the measures and interventions to be taken to ensure people were protected from the risk of harm. The care plans we viewed also showed us that people’s health was monitored and referrals were made to other health care professionals where necessary, for example: their GP, community nurse or optician.

Our observations during the inspection showed us that people who used the service were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to meet their individual needs and wishes.

When we looked at the staff training records, they showed us staff were supported and able to maintain and develop their skills through training and development opportunities were accessible at this service. The staff we spoke with confirmed they attended a range of valuable learning opportunities. They told us they had regular supervisions and appraisals with the registered manager, where they had the opportunity to discuss their care practice and identify further mandatory and vocational training needs. We also viewed records that showed us there were robust recruitment processes in place.

We observed how the service administered medicines and how they did this safely. We looked at how records were kept and spoke with the registered manager about how senior staff were trained to administer medicine and we found that the medicine administering process was safe.

People were actively encouraged to participate in numerous activities that were well thought out, organised, personalised and meaningful to them including exercise classes and reading. We saw staff spending their time positively engaging with people as a group and on a one to one basis in meaningful activities. We saw evidence that people were supported to go out regularly too.

We saw people were encouraged to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. The daily menu that we saw was reflective of people’s likes and dislikes and offered varied choices and it was not an issue if people wanted something different.

We saw a complaints and compliments procedure was in place. This provided information on the action to take if someone wished to make a complaint and what they should expect to happen next. The compliments that we looked at were complimentary to the care staff, management and the service as a whole. People also had their rights respected and access to advocacy services if needed.

People were supported to play an active role within their local community and were on first name terms at the local shops and amenities.

We found an effective quality assurance survey took place regularly and we looked at the results. The service had been regularly reviewed through a range of internal and external audits. We saw that action had been taken to improve the service or put right any issues found. We found people who used the service and their representatives were regularly asked for their views about the care and service they received at meetings and via surveys.