You are here

Disabilities Trust - 22 Woodlands Road Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 29 September 2017

The inspection took place on 17 August 2017 and was announced. Disabilities Trust - 22 Woodlands Road provides accommodation with personal care for up to three people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were three people living there.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of 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.

We last inspected the service in June 2016 and found that medicines were not always safely managed. We also found that the systems in place to monitor the quality of the service had not been analysed to identify areas for improvement. At this inspection we found improvements had been made. People’s medicines were managed safely and there were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and to highlight where action was needed.

Relatives said they were confident that the service was safe. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to keep people safe. Risks to people's safety were appropriately assessed and managed.

Staff understood how to identify any safeguarding concerns and knew the process of reporting such concerns. Medicines were administered, recorded and stored in line with current guidelines.

Staff had been recruited safely to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe.

The registered manager was knowledgeable about The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The MCA Code of Practice was followed when people were not able to make important decisions themselves. The registered manager and staff understood their responsibility to ensure people's rights were protected.

Records showed that staff received the training they needed to keep people safe. The manager had taken action to ensure that training was kept up-to-date and future training was planned.

Staff told us they felt supported by the management and received supervision and appraisals, which helped to identify their training and development needs.

People had regular access to healthcare professionals. People’s individual preferences regarding food were always taken into account and they were supported to eat a healthy diet.

We observed that people had positive relationships with staff and were treated in a caring and respectful manner. Staff delivered their support in a calm, relaxed and considerate manner. People and their relatives were actively encouraged to participate in the planning of people’s care. Staff were empathic when dealing with people's privacy and dignity.

We found the service was extremely responsive in promoting a person-centred lifestyle. Optimising communication was seen as key to making a difference to people’s quality of life. People were supported by staff that were proactive in finding imaginative ways to help achieve their goals. Care plans were person-centred and ensured the care and support suited people’s needs and expectations. People’s own preferences were reflected in the support they received.

The management encouraged, appreciated and acted on people's and relatives’ opinions on the service. Such information was used to implement changes and enhance the functioning of the service. People and staff had confidence in the manager as their leader and were complimentary about the positive culture within the service. There were systems and processes in place to help monitor the quality of the care people received.

Inspection areas



Updated 29 September 2017

The service was safe.

People were kept safe from abuse. The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities and knew how to report any concerns.

People's risks associated with their care were managed to help ensure people's freedom was supported and maintained.

Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to the management and administration of medicines.



Updated 29 September 2017

The service was effective.

Staff had completed appropriate training to enable them to provide people with care effectively. Staff were supervised and felt well supported by the whole team and the registered manager.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how this applied to their daily work.

People received health care support when they needed it.



Updated 29 September 2017

The service was caring.

People were cared for by staff who were kind and who delivered care in a compassionate way.

People's privacy and dignity were promoted and staff were aware of the importance of supporting people to sustain their independence.

People were supported to maintain relationships with their families.



Updated 29 September 2017

The service was very responsive.

People�s communication needs were seen as central to creating person-centred support.

Support plans were personalised, up-to-date and included specific information about people�s backgrounds, events and persons important to people.

People were supported to participate in a range of activities and were encouraged to pursue their hobbies and interests.

The service had a procedure to receive and respond to complaints. People knew how they could complain about the service if they needed to.



Updated 29 September 2017

The service was well-led.

Staff and people spoke highly of the registered manager and assistant manager and the way they ran the home.

Staff were supported by the registered manager and told us they felt able to have open and transparent discussions with them.

The quality of the service was monitored and there were systems in place to make necessary improvements.