You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 21 January 2020

About the service

Greenwood is a residential home providing short stay respite care for 15 young people and adults. People using the service had a learning disability and may also have a physical disability, sensory impairment or mental health issues. 140 people had used the service in the past year for short stays and respite care. The length of time people stayed was dependent on the needs of the individual and their relatives/carers.

Greenwood is a large detached, purpose built property set in a residential area. The service has two floors and is surrounded by an accessible garden. The service has large communal areas and 13 bedrooms are en suite the remaining two being left for people with acute sensory issues.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people that use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice and independence. People using the service received planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that was appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using the service and what we found

Care and support provided was person-centred. People were supported by relatives/carers every time care plans and risk documents were reviewed and updated. Most people attended a local day centre but those who did not, used the Greendays service provided at the service. Greendays offered a comprehensive range of activities and outings, selected by people. Strong links had been established within the local community. A robust complaints policy was in place and accessible in a variety of formats for people to use. Complaints were few but were all addressed in a timely way with evidence seen of learning being carried forward.

The registered manager had worked at the service for 20 years and had taken up the managerial role in 2017. People, relatives/carers and professionals all spoke highly of the manager. Staff at the service were assigned lead roles and took responsibility for certain work, for example manual handling. Monthly reports were provided to the registered manager who would then audit all aspects of the service. The service placed value on feedback and every opportunity was taken to ask people, relatives, professionals and visitors to the service, their views. Feedback fed directly into the service improvement plan. The registered manager told us, “There is no service like this,” and “Respite is wonderful.”

People we spoke with told us they felt safe. This view was supported by relatives/carers and professionals. Staff took time to read and update care plans and risk assessments and they knew people well and responded to their care and support needs. Staff were able to describe to us what they felt would amount to a safeguarding issue and were able to tell us the correct course of action to take and who to report incidents to. Detailed risk assessments, tailored specifically to people’s needs were in place and people, staff, relatives and professionals were involved in regular reviews. Staff were recruited safely and a staff to people matrix ensured that there were always enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. The induction process was robust and had evolved over time to include feedback from staff. People brought their medication with them and it was safely stored and dispensed.

People were supported by staff during their time at Greenwood. They were supported to have control and choice about the things that they did throughout the day. Staff training was in place and was relevant to meet the needs of the people using the service. Training included safeguarding, mental capacity and epilepsy. Staff could request training if they felt it would help meet the needs of people. People’s

Inspection areas



Updated 21 January 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 21 January 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 21 January 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 21 January 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 21 January 2020

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.