You are here

Greenways Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 5 October 2019

About the service

Greenways is a care home registered for a maximum of 17 adults, some of whom may have learning disabilities or mental health care needs. The home is a three storey, detached house with parking at the front and a large garden at the back. At the time of our visit, there were 13 people living in the home.

This care home had been registered before Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance had been developed. Registering the Right Support guidance focuses on values that include choice, inclusion and the promotion of people’s independence so that people living with learning disabilities or autism can live a life as ordinary as any other citizen. The home aimed at providing people using the service with care that was planned, co-ordinated and person-centred. People were provided with the support they needed to make decisions about their lives so that they can develop their independence and participate fully within the local community.

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

People told us they were mostly satisfied with the care provided. They stated that staff treated them with respect and dignity and they felt safe in the home.

Staff had been carefully recruited and essential pre-employment checks had been carried out. The staffing levels were adequate. We however, noted that the staff rota was inaccurate and did not accurately reflect the working hours of the managers. This meant that staff were not always aware of when the managers would be on duty.

A significant number of staff recruited within the past 18 months had not received all the required training. This meant that we cannot be confident if they had the necessary knowledge and skills to support people. We have made a requirement in respect of this.

The manager and deputy manager provided staff with regular supervision and a yearly appraisal of their performance. Some staff however, felt unsupported by management.

The service was undergoing a period of change following the departure of two registered managers in the past 13 months. There had been a high number of disciplinary action against some staff. This indicated that difficulties were experienced in the management of the service. Regular audits and checks had been carried out. However, we noted shortcomings in various areas. We have made a requirement in respect of this.

The premises were clean and tidy. There was a record of essential maintenance carried out. Suitable fire safety arrangements were in place. We noted that the emergency pull cords in bathrooms and toilets had being tied up so that they may be out of reach of people who had fallen to the ground. These were untied soon after the inspection.

Risks to people’s health and wellbeing had been assessed and these included risks associated with behaviour which challenged the service and certain medical conditions. Risk assessments contained guidance to staff for minimising risks to people.

There were arrangements to safeguard people from abuse. Staff we spoke with were aware of the procedure to follow if they suspected that people were subject to abuse.

The service had a policy and procedure for the administration of medicines. People had received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff supported people to have a healthy and nutritious diet. People were mostly satisfied with the meals provided. individual dietary needs and preferences were responded to.

The healthcare needs of people had been assessed. People could access the services of healthcare professionals when needed.

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 services supported this practice.

Staff were caring and formed positive relationships with people. They had received training in ensuring equality and valuing diversity and treated all people with respect . The service

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 October 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 5 October 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 October 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 5 October 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 5 October 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well led findings below.