• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Amy Woodgate

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Nigel Fisher Way, Chessington, Surrey, KT9 2SN (020) 8274 4050

Provided and run by:
Your Healthcare Community Interest Company

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile
Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

13 March 2018

During a routine inspection

Amy Woodgate 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 service provides residential care and support for people who are living with dementia. Amy Woodgate can support up to 44 people, including two respite placements, across four units. Coombe Unit is a male only unit for up to four people. The Lodge provides support to up to 12 people who are assessed as being more independent. Richmond and Malden provide support to up to 14 people on each unit. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 38 people.

A 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.

This inspection visit took place on 13 and 22 March 2018. Our first visit was unannounced.

At our last inspection we rated the service 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.

People using the service and their relatives were very positive about the care and support provided at Amy Woodgate. They said staff treated people respectfully and in a kind and caring manner.

We found 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. Individual care and support needs were fully assessed, documented and reviewed at regular intervals.

People were supported by staff who were trained and well supported in their job roles. Staff members had been safely recruited and had received an induction to the service. Staff we spoke with were confident that they provided a good service to people and said they would recommend Amy Woodgate to others. They had access to supervision and additional support when required.

A consistent established core team of staff provided continuity of care to the people staying there. Some relatives told us they would welcome more permanent staff on duty with the home relying less on agency staff.

People and their relatives or friends felt able to raise any concerns or complaints. There was a procedure in place for people to follow if they wanted to raise any issues. Staff also said they felt comfortable in raising any concerns should they have any.

Staff had received training around safeguarding vulnerable people and knew what action to take if they had or received a concern.

People using the service and their relatives said how clean the home was kept.

The service was exceptionally well led. An experienced registered manager promoted high standards of care and person centred support for people using the service at Amy Woodgate. They monitored the quality of the service and made changes to improve the service provided when required. People who used the service, their relatives and staff found the registered manager and her staff to be approachable and responsive. Staff told us that they would welcome more engagement from senior organisational managers.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

27 and 29 October 2015

During a routine inspection

We undertook this unannounced inspection on 27 and 29 October 2015. At our previous inspection on 15 and 30 January 2014 the service was meeting the regulations inspected.

Amy Woodgate provides residential care and support for people who are living with dementia. The care home can support up to 44 people, including two respite placements, across four units. Coombe Unit was a male only unit for up to four people. The Lodge provided support to up to 12 people who were assessed as being more independent. Richmond and Malden provided support to up to 14 people on each unit. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 41 people.

A 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.

There were sufficient staff to keep people safe. Staff received regular training and supervision to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs. Staff felt well supported by the management team and their views and opinions were listened to.

Staff were aware of the risks to people’s safety and supported people appropriately to manage those risks. This included supporting people to minimise the risk of choking, falling and developing pressure ulcers. Staff supported people to manage their health needs and arranged for health care professionals to visit them when required. Staff supported people with their nutritional needs and food and drink was provided throughout the day. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.

Care plans detailed what tasks people were able to do independently and where they required support from staff. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual needs, their preferences and their likes. Staff supported people in line with their preferences and used the knowledge they obtained through conversations with people and their family to provide an individually tailored service.

Staff were aware of who had the capacity to make decisions about their care. Staff supported people in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. ‘Best interests’ meeting were held when people did not have the capacity to make decisions themselves. The majority of people did not have the capacity to make decisions about their safety and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were in place. DoLS is a way of making sure that people are only deprived of their liberty in a safe and correct way, when it is in their best interests and there is no other way to look after them.

People, and their families, were supported to make decisions about end of life care. People were supported to stay at the service if that was where they wished to spend their final hours, and one to one staffing was provided to support the person and their family.

Staff supported people to engage in activities they enjoyed. This included supporting people to undertake tasks relevant to previous employment. The staff had identified people who may benefit from additional support and arranged for them to access creative therapies, including art therapy and drama therapy. The service linked with a local school to provide additional opportunities for people to engage in activities and socialise.

The service learnt from previous mistakes and staff were supported to improve the quality of care they provided. This included learning from previous medicines errors. Staff were supported and encouraged to implement changes at the service to improve practice. This included the development of duty sheets to enable staff to provide a personalised service.

The service implemented national initiatives to review the quality of their service and provide an individually tailored service. This included ‘dementia care mapping’ and the Eden Alternative principles. The principles of the Eden Alternative helped staff to empower people and to deliver timely, individualised care.

The service was creative and implemented their own initiatives including the development of a reminiscence room, a shop and a beach hut. The service had received the Mayor’s award for their shop. The Mayor’s Award recognises the contribution made by individuals or groups which improves the lives of the local population.

The registered manager ensured a safe environment was provided by undertaking regular safety checks and ensuring any maintenance required was addressed. Equipment was regularly checked to ensure it was safe to use with people. The environment was adapted to meet the needs of people with dementia.

15, 30 January 2014

During a themed inspection looking at Dementia Services

We spoke with twelve people using the service, four relatives or friends of people using the service, seven staff members and two managers during our two visits to Amy Woodgate. Comment cards were received from eight relatives or friends following the inspection.

The people living at Amy Woodgate told us "not bad is it, they do their level best", "It's good, there's a niceness about it", "I think it's alright here" and "we've always enjoyed it here". One person said "you are doing a report? Well tell them that there are no complaints here".

Feedback from relatives or friends included "overall I am thrilled with the care that is provided", "the home is fantastic", "the staff are wonderful to the residents and work hard" and "we are very pleased with the care". One person told us "we have nothing but praise for the loving care and attention" and complimented the "compassion, respect and dignity" shown by the service. Comments from individuals as to what could be further improved included having one more permanent staff member on each shift, reducing the use of agency staff, using more volunteers and having a dedicated recreation / activities area for the whole home. One person commented "otherwise this home is a perfect example of how dementia homes should be run".