Greenways Court

Updated 13 February 2019

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 23 and 25 October 2018. The first day of the inspection was unannounced which meant the provider did not know we would be visiting. The second day of inspection was announced so the provider knew we would be returning. The inspection team was made up of one adult social care inspector, one assistant inspector and one expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

We reviewed information we held about the service, including the notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send us within required timescales.

The provider completed a provider information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We contacted the commissioners of the relevant local authorities, the local authority safeguarding team, and other professionals who worked with the service to gain their views of the care provided at Greenways Court.

During the inspection we spent time with people living at the service. We spoke with 12 people and eight relatives or visitors. We also spoke with the provider’s representative (regional manager), the registered manager, two senior care assistants, five care assistants, the administrator, the head chef, a kitchen assistant, a domestic and the maintenance person.

We reviewed four people's care records and three staff recruitment files. We reviewed medicine administration records for 10 people as well as records relating to staff training, supervisions and the management of the service.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Updated 13 February 2019

This inspection took place on 23 October 2018 and was unannounced. A second day of inspection took place on 25 October 2018 and was announced.

Greenways Court 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. Greenways Court provides personal care for up to 51 people. At the time of our inspection there were 48 people living at the home who received personal care, some of whom were living with a dementia.

A registered manager was in place at the time of our inspection. 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.

At our last inspection in February 2016 we awarded an overall rating of outstanding. At this inspection we found the service was good overall and we have rated the key question responsive as outstanding.

During this inspection we found staff provided extremely compassionate end of life care. A relative told us how staff had gone the extra mile and been instrumental in ensuring their loved one had a dignified death. They told us how staff had provided enormous support to the whole family and had been able to anticipate the family’s needs at such a sad time. Relatives described staff as outstanding in meeting people’s care and emotional needs.

Staff were highly effective at providing and engaging people with access to a wide range of activities. People were actively encouraged to bring their hobbies and interests with them when they moved in, which meant people's lives had continuity and individuality. People and relatives told us how activities and events had improved people's quality of life.

Staff training in key areas was up to date. Staff received regular supervisions and appraisals and told us they felt supported.

Staff had received training in safeguarding and knew how to respond to any concerns. Safeguarding referrals had been made to the local authority appropriately, in line with set protocols.

A thorough recruitment and selection process was in place which ensured staff had the right skills and experience to support people who used the service.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and attend appointments with healthcare professionals.

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

Risks to people were assessed and they were supported to do the things they chose in as safe a way as possible.

The home was clean and in a good state of repair. There was a warm, welcoming atmosphere.

Staff were trained in infection control and during our inspection we observed staff following good infection control practices.

People's privacy and dignity were respected. Staff spoke to people kindly and calmly.

Care plans were detailed and person-centred and contained important information about people’s life stories so staff could get to know people well.

People and relatives knew how to make a complaint and were happy approaching staff or the registered manager if they had any concerns.

People were supported to engage in meaningful activities and access the local community.

Systems and audits were in place to regularly check standards and to support improvements within the home.

People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the registered manager being an effective leader. Staff said they felt supported and able to raise issues at any time.

The home had good links with the local community and people told us how much they enjoyed this.