You are here

Archived: Woodland Court Residential Home

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 16 May 2014
Date of Publication: 19 June 2014
Inspection Report published 19 June 2014 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 16 May 2014, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

The people who used the service and their representatives told us they were consulted about the outcome of quality audits. The deputy general manager had a standardised approach to assessing and monitoring the quality of service across the five homes they had responsibility for. An audit was carried out monthly in addition to the weekly audits carried out by staff at Woodland Court Care Home.

The monthly audit looked at a number of areas including the number of care plans that had been reviewed, quality of daily records maintained for each person who used the service and safeguarding alerts raised. The audit also looked at staffing levels, accident and incident reporting fire safety checks and meal provision. The audit considered the evidence to support that standards were being met and what actions were required if improvements were identified. The deputy general manager showed us the last audit that had been undertaken, actions for improvement and how these were being taken forward. An area had been identified in respect of the quality of daily records and the general deputy manager showed us actions that had been taken to address this.

The deputy manager of Woodlands Care Home had a schedule of routine audits and we saw that these had been undertaken in line with the provider’s policy. These audits looked at medication administration and infection control. Bedroom checks were also made as was food safety. Fire tests also formed part of the audit and fire alarms were tested weekly.

The provider had an up to date complaints policy. Complaints could be made to the manager or could be made directly to the deputy general manager. Information about how to complain was also displayed in the hall of the premises. We spoke with people who used the service who told us they knew they had a right to complain and how they could make a complaint. One person told us “I would feel comfortable making a complaint if I needed to”. We spoke with representatives of people who used the service and they told us they were able to make suggestions and raise issues at residents and family meetings. One representative told us “if I wasn’t happy about something I would discuss it straight away with a member of staff”. The provider told us they had received a complaint since their last inspection. We saw that the complaint had been taken seriously. An investigation had been undertaken and a timely written response had been made by the deputy general manager.

The provider had an emergency plan in place for Woodland Court Care Home and it had been reviewed in February 2014. The plan included actions to be taken in the event of fire, flood, missing residents, medical emergencies and staffing shortages.

The provider held regular residents and families meeting to discuss the general running of the home and any quality of care issues. The minutes of the last meeting were displayed in the hall of the premises and we saw changes in management arrangements and the wellbeing of people who used the service had been discussed. An issue had been raised about staff not always wearing their name badges. At our inspection we saw that some staff were still not wearing their name badges and we bought this to the attention of the deputy general manager. We were told that this would be addressed again individually with staff and in team meetings.

All incidents within Woodland Court Care Home were recorded in people’s daily records as were issues relating to their care and welfare. There was a handover period between shifts where the staff discussed any concerns or incidences and what needed to happen to minimise any further incidences. The staff we spoke with told us the handover sessions were important as they could pass on any information about changes in behaviour for people who used the service.

Staff also told us they received good support from the manager and that any training needs they had were identified and training supplied as to ensure that