Archived: Woodland Grove

Updated 9 May 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 checked 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.

The inspection of Woodland Grove commenced on 13 and 14 December 2016 and was unannounced which meant that the provider did not know that we were coming. The inspection was carried out by two inspectors and an inspection manager who was carrying out the role of a specialist advisor. The inspection was prompted in part by notification of an incident. This inspection also looked at how the service managed the overall risks to people living at the service and at the time of the inspection we found that these were being managed effectively.

We looked at previous inspection records and intelligence we had received about the service and notifications. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to send to us.

Whilst some people who used the service were able to talk to us, others could not. We carried out a Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experiences of people who could not talk with us. During our inspection we observed how staff interacted with people and we spent time observing the support and care provided to people which helped us understand their experiences. We observed care and support in various communal areas, at night, during meal times and observed peoples activities.

We inspected the care plans of eleven people and looked at information about how the service was managed. These included medicine records, staff training, recruitment and supervision records, accidents and incidents, complaints, clinical governance, audits and policies and procedures. Reviewing these records helped us to understand how the provider responded and acted on issues related to the care and welfare of people.

As part of the inspection we also spoke with the registered manager, the hospitality manager, nine people who use the service, two relatives, ten members of staff and a visiting GP. Healthcare professionals were approached for comments about the service and any feedback received has been included in the report.

Updated 9 May 2017

Woodland Grove provides nursing care and accommodation for up to 72 older people. On the day of our inspection there were 65 people using the service.

The registered manager was present during our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.

On the day of our inspection people told us, and we found, that there were enough staff on shift to meet the needs of people who used the service.

The registered manager and staff involved people to make decisions about the service they received and obtained people’s feedback on how the service should be run. People told us that staff understood their needs and preferences well, and they received effective care and support from well-trained staff.

Staff understood how to keep people safe and could describe the correct steps they would take if they were concerned that abuse had taken place.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and investigated. Risk assessments were in place for people who used the service.

Call bells were not always responded to in the most responsive and timely way. Staff took an active part in meeting people's social wellbeing and this was viewed by the staff and registered manager as being just as important as meeting someone’s physical and personal care needs.

People had developed caring relationships with the staff that supported them. Relatives told us that there was a positive atmosphere and people were encouraged to take part in the activities they wanted to pursue. A wide range of activities were on offer to people.

The registered provider worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and followed the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People lived in an environment that met their needs and enjoyed the food on offer. Living areas and equipment were clean and well maintained.

Medicines were managed safely and staff members understood their responsibilities. The registered manager undertook regular audits and improvements were carried out when these were needed. The quality of the service was monitored and assessed consistently.

People who used the service, family members, and visitors were encouraged to make comments, complaints, or compliments about the service.

The service had good links with the local community, including local schools and colleges. People who used the service, their family members, and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service they received.