Woodside Farm House

Updated 1 December 2021

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector

Service and service type

Woodside Farm House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. The provider did not complete the required Provider Information Return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about the service, what it does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account in making our judgements in this report. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We observed some care and support interactions as people were not able to share their feedback with us about living at Woodside Farm House. We looked at records and support plans relating to two people’s care. These included risk assessments and incident records. We spoke with four members of staff on duty and the registered manager and deputy manager. We also reviewed information relating to the management of the home including quality monitoring audits.

After the inspection

We spoke with four relatives, a health and social care professional and received feedback from six staff. We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at care documents and quality assurance records.

Updated 1 December 2021

About the service

Woodside Farm House is a care home for up to eight people with a learning disability and autistic people. At the time of the inspection there were seven people living in the service. Three people were living in self-contained accommodation at the rear of the main house. Woodside Farm House is part of the Potens group, a national provider of health and social care support services for children and adults with disabilities and complex needs.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

Right support:

The model of care and setting maximised people’s choice, control and independence. Woodside Farm House is near to the centre of St Austell town and people had access to the local community and amenities. Staff supported people to make choices about their daily lives and engage in activities, that were tailored to their individual needs and promoted their independence. People were supported to maintain and develop relationships.

Right care:

People received good quality person-centred care that promoted their dignity, privacy and human rights. There was a strong person-centred culture within the staff team. Positive behaviour support plans had been developed for people, to help staff understand the reasons for their behaviour, and provide guidance to ensure consistent approaches were used when supporting people. Staff knew people well and demonstrated an understanding of people’s individual care, behavioural and communication needs. This helped ensure people people’s views were heard and their diverse needs met.

Right culture:

The ethos, values, and attitudes of management and care staff ensured people led confident, inclusive and empowered lives. Staff created an environment that inspired people to understand and achieve their goals and ambitions.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The registered manager had identified there were insufficient numbers of permanent staff to cover all shifts. Therefore, they had block booked specific agency staff members to cover the vacant shifts. This ensured shifts were covered by consistent staff. Enough staff were employed each day to meet people's needs, keep them safe and give them the opportunity to take part in their chosen activity.

Medicines were administered and managed safely. Some people were prescribed 'as required' medicines for pain relief or to help them to manage anxiety. Records evidenced that when these medicines were prescribed there was involvement from health and social care professionals as to in what situations and when these medicines should be administered and how they should be reviewed. The organisation agreed they would remind staff of the STOMP (Stopping Over Medication of People with a Learning Disability) principles for the use of certain medicines.

Some ‘as required’ protocols were not dated and therefore staff would not be assured that this was the most up to date guidance and would not be aware when it was due to be reviewed. The registered manager agreed to address this immediately.

People were offered choice and control and where able, consented to their care and support. Pictures and photographs were used to facilitate effective communication. Staff supported people to be as independent as possible with activities of daily living, such as laundry, cooking, shopping and personal care. People were supported to take part in community activities of their choice and interest.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff’s knowledge of how people communicated ensured people had maximum control over their lives and how they spent their time. Care and behaviour support plans were accurate and kept under regular review, with the involvement of the person and their family. They provided staff with comprehensive guidance to ensure people’s needs were met. Risks were identified and staff had clear instructions to help them support people to reduce the risk of avoidable harm.

Staff were recruited safely. Staff were supported by a system of induction, training, supervisions, appraisals and staff meetings. Staff were appropriately trained, and their competency regularly checked, to ensure people’s complex needs were met.

Cleaning and infection control procedures had been updated in line with COVID-19 guidance to help protect people, visitors and staff from the risk of infection. Government guidance about COVID-19 testing for people, staff and visitors was being followed.

People’s relatives and staff told us management were approachable and they listened to them when they had any concerns or ideas. All feedback was used to make continuous improvements to the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (Published 9 August 2021).

Why we inspected

We undertook this focused inspection to check on specific concerns we had about the service. We received concerns in relation to staffing levels and the impact this had on the quality of care and support that was being provided. We also received some concerns about medicines. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe, effective and well-led only.

We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other key questions. We therefore did not inspect them. Ratings from previous comprehensive inspections for those key questions were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.