Greenwood

Updated 21 January 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Greenwood is a ‘care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. Greenwood is a respite service. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safe care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because people are often out and we wanted to be sure there would be people at the service to speak with us.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with four people who used the service. We spoke with ten members of staff including the operations manager, the registered manager, three team leaders, four support workers and a member of administration staff. We spoke to one relative. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We reviewed a range of records including three people’s care plans and several medication records. We looked at staff files in relation to recruitment and supervision and a variety of records relating to the management of the service for example, policies, procedures and audit processes. We pathway tracked two people. This is where we check that the records for people match the support they receive from the service.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the deputy manager to validate the evidence found. We spoke with four relatives and three professionals, a nutritional nurse, a senior practitioner in the community learning disability team and a specialist councillor, who have regular contact with the service.

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 hydration and nutritional needs were met and support was provided where needed. People were supported with health and social care needs appointments if required although these were few due to the nature of the service.

People and relatives told us that staff were kind, caring and attentive to people’s needs. Peoples’ privacy, dignity and independence were respected and promoted. Staff described respite care as a time when people were on holiday from their usual routines and they were supported safely to do things that they wanted to. The principles of the Equalities Act 2000 were upheld and people’s differences were respected and celebrated.

For more details, see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at the last inspection

The last rating for this service was good. (Published 12 January 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.