• Care Home
  • Care home

Binley Woods

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

229 Rugby Road, Binley Woods, Coventry, West Midlands, CV3 2BB (024) 7654 5671

Provided and run by:
Young Foundations Limited

All Inspections

4 August 2022

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Binley Woods on 4 August 2022. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Binley Woods, you can give feedback on this service.

8 March 2018

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 8 March 2018, and was unannounced.

Binley Woods is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home is split over two floors comprising communal areas and a kitchen. The service is registered to provide care and accommodation for to up to five people with mental health difficulties. At the time of our inspection there were five people living in the home.

At our last inspection we rated the service as Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

A new registered manager was in post. 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.

The registered manager took over from the previous manager in June 2017.

People felt safe with the staff who supported them, and we saw people were comfortable with staff. Staff received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and understood what action they should take in order to protect people from abuse. Risks to people’s safety were identified and minimised to keep people safe.

People were supported with their medicines by staff who were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines safely. Staff recorded medicines administration according to the provider’s policy and procedure, and checks were in place to ensure medicines were managed safely.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs effectively. The provider conducted pre-employment checks prior to staff starting work, to ensure their suitability to support people. Staff told us they had not been able to work until these checks had been completed.

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.

People and relatives told us staff were respectful and treated people with dignity. We observed this during interactions between people. The ethos of the home was focussed on supporting people to achieve as much as possible and moving them towards more independent living.

People were supported to make choices about their day to day lives. For example, they were supported to maintain any activities, interests and relationships that were important to them.

People had access to health care professionals when needed and care records showed support provided was in line with what had been recommended. The provider’s own clinical team worked effectively with community health professionals, and plans were in place to further improve this.

People’s care records were written in a way which helped staff to deliver personalised care and gave staff information about people’s communication, their likes, dislikes and preferences. Plans were in place to change all care plans to a new format which would provider even more personalised information. People and relatives were involved in how their care and support was delivered.

People and relatives felt able to raise any concerns with the registered manager. They felt these would be listened to and responded to effectively and in a timely way. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and effective in running the home and making positive changes. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the support provided, through checks made both by the registered manager and also the provider.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

21 January 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 21 January 2016 and was unannounced.

Binley Woods provides accommodation and support for up to five younger adults. At the time of our inspection visit there were three people living in the home.

The service does not currently have a registered manager. 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. An acting manager is in place, and a recruitment process is currently underway to recruit a registered manager.

People were comfortable with the staff who supported them. Relatives were confident people were safe living in the home. Staff received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and were supported by the provider’s safeguarding policies and procedures. Staff understood what action they should take in order to protect people from abuse. Risks to people’s safety were identified, minimised and flexed towards individual needs so people could be supported in the least restrictive way possible and build their independence.

People were supported with their medicines by staff that were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines safely. Medicines were given in a timely way and as prescribed. Regular checks of medicines helped ensure any issues were identified and action could be taken as a result.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. The provider conducted pre-employment checks prior to staff starting work to ensure their suitability to support people who lived in the home. Staff told us they had not been able to work until these checks had been completed. Staff were recruited carefully to ensure they had the right skills and values to support people.

The provider assessed people’s capacity where this was necessary. Staff and the registered manager had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, and the need to seek informed consent from people before delivering care and support. The provider sought legal authorisation where restrictions were in place in order to support people safely.

People told us staff were respectful and treated them with dignity and respect. We also saw this in interactions between people and records confirmed how people’s privacy and dignity was maintained. People were supported to make choices about their day to day lives. For example, they could choose what to eat and drink and when, and were supported to maintain any activities, interests and relationships that were important to them.

People had access to health professionals whenever necessary, and we saw that the care and support provided in the home was in line with what had been recommended. People’s care records were written in a way which helped staff to deliver personalised care, which focussed on the achievement of goals. People were involved in how their care and support was delivered, and they were able to decide how they wanted their needs to be met.

Staff told us the management team were approachable and responsive to their ideas and suggestions. There were systems to monitor the quality of the support provided in the home. The provider ensured that recommended actions were clearly documented and acted upon by undertaking regular unannounced visits to the home.

21 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two people who lived at Binley Woods about their experiences of the service. We observed the care that was given to people during our inspection. We also spoke with three members of staff, an advocate and the registered manager.

People we spoke with told us that the care that was discussed with them matched the care that was provided to them. We saw that regular reviews of people's care and support plans described their progress towards their goals. We saw that staff listened to people about their care needs and their wishes. We saw people's independence was promoted within their support plans and on the day of our inspection.

We found that the care plans were person centred and reflected people's individual needs. We saw the members of staff supported people as detailed within their care plans. We observed that staff were compassionate and caring when supporting people.

People we spoke with told us that staff were friendly and supported their needs well. We saw staff knew what people's care needs were and how they needed to be supported.

We spoke with two staff members about what they thought abuse was and they showed they had a good awareness of the importance of keeping people safe. They understood their responsibilities for reporting any concerns regarding potential abuse.

We found the service was well led and had systems in place to monitor the quality of service being provided.

19 June 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two people who lived at Binley Woods and looked at their care plans. We spoke with two members of staff from Binley Woods.

We also gathered information of people's experiences of the service by reviewing people's key worker sessions and the complaints log. We found that people's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the provider provided their care.

We saw that care plans were person centred and written in a format the person could understand. For example, we saw a care plan which had a picture story board to help the person understand the information within the plan.

We saw that peoples' needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We saw people were promoted with their independence and were supported with community involvement.

People we spoke with told us that staff were 'nice' and supportive with their needs.

People we spoke with told us that they felt safe within the home and knew who to speak to if they had any concerns. We saw that the complaints policy was available in an easy to read format.

Staff we spoke with told us about the training they had undertaken and the support they received was appropriate for the needs of people using the service. Staff also told us they had regular supervision sessions and they felt supported within their role.

We saw that the registered manager completed monthly checks and these were reviewed by the provider. We saw that the provider had undertaken a survey on the quality of the service for people who lived at Binley Woods.

4 March 2011

During a routine inspection

People we spoke with during the visit told us that they were consulted about their care and could make decisions about how they wanted to spend their time. One person who used the service told us they were aware of their plan of care and could look at this if they wanted to. The plans were regularly reviewed by key workers.

Staff told us they updated the care plans and entered the day to day recordings and the key worker sessions.

Each person had their own private room and their own key. They said they were encouraged and supported to decorate the room as they wished. Each person there on the day of the visit showed us into their room and said how they decorated it and kept it clean and tidy.

People said they were given the opportunity to participate in activities that were of interest to them. They told us the staff always treated them well and that their privacy was respected.

People told us they were able to choose from a range of foods, and supported to plan and prepare their own meals in a safe environment. We asked people if they felt listened to, and if they were able to speak to somebody if they were worried or frightened.

One person spoke very positively about the managers and said that they would go to them or a key worker if needed to do so. One said that the people got on with each other and if someone was getting on his nerves would remove himself to a quiet place or talk to staff.

People spoken with were generally aware of the procedure for making a complaint, and those able to do so said that they would talk to staff or the manager if they were unhappy about anything. We saw that advocates are used where people may not have the ability to voice their opinions alone.

Comments from people who use the service about the standards of care and support and their experiences included:

'This place is more like a home than a school'

' I have regular sessions with my key worker and am aware that they are writing these down'

' I can go to staff when I feel frustrated and they will do something about it.'

'We have a laugh here and there is always something going on'

'I really like my room, it is my own space and I would hate it if people just walked in here'