Woodfield House

Updated 16 March 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 7 January 2019 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector and an 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. The expert spoke with people and observed care.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service. We also reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to us by law.

During the inspection we spoke with four people using the service, and talked with two support staff. On the day of the inspection the registered manager and deputy manager were not available. However, we spoke with them as part of the inspection and they sent us additional documents we requested.

On the day of the inspection we looked at two people’s care plans and associated care records. We checked two boxed medicine stocks against medicine administration records (MAR), and looked at a range of documents related to the management of the service including building safety and maintenance and quality audits. There had not been any staff recruited within the previous 12 months at the service, therefore how the service recruited staff was not checked on this inspection.

Following the inspection. we received feedback from two health and social care professionals and obtained further detailed information from the registered management regarding the management of the service.

Updated 16 March 2019

This inspection took place on 7 January 2019 and was unannounced. The previous inspection took place on 12 May 2016 and the service was rated Good.

Woodfield House 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. At the time of the inspection there were five people living at the service, although one person was on social leave for an extended period of time.

We have written this inspection report in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service as Good has not changed since our last inspection.

People told us the service felt like home and staff were kind to them. People told us they felt safe and the staff had received safeguarding adults training and understood how to protect people from harm. People told us there were enough staff to meet their needs.

Care records were up to date and there were risk assessments in place to provide information to staff in caring for people.

Medicines were safely stored and administered.

Staff had regular supervision and had completed training in key areas. Staff meetings took place and staff told us they could contribute ideas on how the service ran.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives, although there was lack of clarity regarding one person’s liberty to leave the building unaccompanied. This aside staff supported people them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection. Accidents and incidents were logged and were reviewed; learning took place.

The registered manager was well regarded by health and social care professionals and audits took place in key areas, although audits had not identified duplicate and at times contradictory information in the care records.

We have made a recommendation in relation to getting feedback on the service from all interested parties.