You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

We are carrying out a review of quality at Willow Brook Care Home. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 31 May 2017

This inspection took place on 28 and 31 March 2017 and was unannounced.

Accommodation for up to 49 people is provided in the service. The service is designed to meet the needs of older people living with or without dementia. There were 33 people using the service at the time of our inspection.

A registered manager was in post and was available throughout the 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.

Staff knew how to keep people safe and understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. Risks were managed so that people were protected from avoidable harm and not unnecessarily restricted, though the completion of documentation to demonstrate that the risk of skin damage had been managed could be improved.

Sufficient staff were on duty to meet people’s needs and staff were recruited through safe recruitment practices. Medicines were safely managed, though the completion of cream chart documentation could be improved.

Staff received appropriate induction, training, supervision and appraisal. People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People received sufficient to eat and drink, though the completion of food chart documentation could be improved. External professionals were involved in people’s care as appropriate. The environment could be improved to better support people living with dementia.

Staff were kind and knew people well. People and their relatives were involved in decisions about their care. Advocacy information was made available to people.

People received care that respected their privacy and dignity and promoted their independence.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Care records contained information to support staff to meet people’s individual needs, though activities could be further improved so that more people could access activities outside the home.

Complaints were handled appropriately. A complaints process was in place and staff knew how to respond to complaints.

People and their relatives were involved or had opportunities to be involved in the development of the service. Staff told us they would be confident in raising any concerns with the management team and that appropriate action would be taken.

The provider was meeting their regulatory responsibilities. There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 31 May 2017

The service was safe.

Staff knew how to keep people safe and understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. Risks were managed so that people were protected from avoidable harm and not unnecessarily restricted, though the completion of documentation to demonstrate that the risk of skin damage had been managed could be improved.

Sufficient staff were on duty to meet people’s needs and staff were recruited through safe recruitment practices. Medicines were safely managed, though the completion of cream chart documentation could be improved.

Effective

Good

Updated 31 May 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received appropriate induction, training, supervision and appraisal. People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People received sufficient to eat and drink, though the completion of food chart documentation could be improved. External professionals were involved in people’s care as appropriate. The environment could be improved to better support people living with dementia.

Caring

Good

Updated 31 May 2017

The service was caring.

Staff were kind and knew people well.

People and their relatives were involved in decisions about their care. Advocacy information was made available to people.

People received care that respected their privacy and dignity and promoted their independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 31 May 2017

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Care records contained information to support staff to meet people’s individual needs, though activities could be further improved so that more people could access activities outside the home.

Complaints were handled appropriately. A complaints process was in place and staff knew how to respond to complaints.

Well-led

Good

Updated 31 May 2017

The service was well-led.

People and their relatives were involved or had opportunities to be involved in the development of the service. Staff told us they would be confident in raising any concerns with the management team and that appropriate action would be taken.

The provider was meeting their regulatory responsibilities. There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.