Archived: Greenwich Gardens

This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building.

The accommodation is bought or rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

Greenwich Gardens in situated in a large modern purpose-designed three-storey building in Derby. There are 98 one and two-bedroomed apartments. These are either rented or part of a shared ownership scheme. There is a range of on-site facilities including a restaurant, social and quiet lounges, a library and cinema room, a hair and beauty salon, a games room, and gardens.

The service caters for people who are usually over the age of 55 and have been referred by the local authority. Some of the people using the service have needs relating to their physical and mental health. At the time of our inspection there were 51 people using Greenwich Gardens’ personal care and support services.

Not everyone living at Greenwich Gardens’ was receiving personal care and support. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

The service had a registered manager. This 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.

People were safe at the service and staff knew how to protect them from abuse. People wore pendant alarms so they could call staff in an emergency. Managers and staff monitored people’s well-being and took preventative action to keep them safe.

There were enough staff on duty to support people and meet their needs. Staff supported some people with their medicines and this was done safely. Staff were trained in infection control and wore PPE (personal protective equipment) to reduce the risk of the spread of infection or illness.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. The staff were well-trained and knowledgeable. Staff assisted people with their meals either in their own apartments or in the ‘pay as you go’ restaurant on the premises.

People’s healthcare needs were met and staff referred them to healthcare professionals where necessary. If people were ill staff visited them regularly to check on their well-being and ensure they were having the healthcare they needed.

Staff were trained in the Mental Capacity Act and sought people’s consent before providing any care or support.

The staff were caring and kind and had developed good relationships with people using the service. They engaged with people and welcomed their relatives and friends when they visited. If people were distressed staff provided them with comfort and reassurance.

Staff respected people and supported them to make choices about their care, support and any individual needs they might have including cultural, religious, and those relating to disability. People told us staff treated them with dignity. People’s personal information was kept securely.

Staff provided people with responsive care that met their needs. Care plans were personalised and written in conjunction with the person themselves and others involved in their care. They included information about people’s life histories which enabled staff to get to know people and take an interest in their lives.

Staff encouraged people to socialise and to join in with activities and events that took part on the premises and provided assistance for them to do this where necessary.

Staff were trained in equality and diversity and information was provided to people in formats that were accessible to them. The service had a complaints procedure and if a person made a complaint they were listened to and their concerns taken seriously.

The service was well-led and people were satisfied with the care and support provided. Staff said they liked working at the service because they were able to provide a high standard of care in a pleasant environment.

Managers carried out regular audits to ensure good quality care was provided. People, relatives, and staff had the opportunity to comment on the service through surveys, meetings and one-to-one discussions. Records showed the service was committed to continual improvement and worked with other agencies to ensure people’s needs were met.