Archived: Coppice Wood Lodge

As part of this inspection we spoke with ten people who used the service and nine staff including four care assistants, the cook, the manager, the provider's area manager and three of assistant managers. We also spoke with a Community Psychiatric Nurse who was visiting people on the day of our inspection and four relatives and friends of people who lived at the home. Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and the staff told us, what we observed during the visit and what we saw in the records we looked at.

Is the service safe?

The training records we looked at showed people were cared for by appropriately skilled staff. People were protected from harm that could be caused by inappropriate administration of medicines because procedures to ensure this were in place and effectively audited. Most of the people we met said they liked the home and felt safe living there. Relatives and friends who told us they visited regularly were confident their relatives and friends, and other people they saw at the home, were safe. Assistance from medical professionals was accessed when needed.

Arrangements had not been put in place to care for people under the Mental Capacity Act in relation to deprivation of liberty safeguards. This was required for some people, where their ability to make informed decisions was limited by their mental health.

Is the service effective?

People's needs had been assessed and care plans drawn up on the basis of these needs. Staff were able to describe the needs of individual people living at the home and tell us how these needs were met. We saw people were mostly relaxed, content and well looked after. Staff were able to calm and reassure people when they became agitated.

People and their relatives said the care provided was very good. One relative told us 'the staff look after people well.' Another said 'this is a very good home. People are well looked after.' A number of people said there was not enough for people to do in the day.

Is the service caring?

Staff were kind and caring. One staff member told us how they helped relatives who were anxious about people coming into residential care and gave examples of how people's health and wellbeing improved because of the care and support they received. Most people told us they were supported by kind and attentive staff who they liked. Two people said they were unhappy about the attitude of some staff.

Is the service responsive?

Relatives said they were able to raise issues of concern and these were taken seriously. Resident's meetings were held and matters people raised were dealt with. Information was not available about the systems in place to gather the views of people and those concerned with their care in order to assess and monitor the quality of care.

Is the service well lead?

The senior team were working well together to provide a good standard of care and to drive through improvements. Particular efforts had been directed at the training and supervision of staff. There was strong leadership of the team and area managers were supportive of senior staff.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. People told us that sufficient staff were available to meet their needs. One person said, 'there are always enough staff around.' The manager had assessed people's needs to make sure that sufficient staff were available.

We found that people who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about care and treatment and they were acted on. The manager showed us a review she had carried out of people's needs that identified the amount of care they needed and when they would need staff support. People and staff had been consulted about changes that the manager had made to the service.

People's needs were assessed and support was delivered to meet their individual needs. One person said, "staff were helpful and kind." Care plans reflected the needs of people, and these were linked to risk assessments. People told us that they had been able to see their general practitioner when they wanted too. One person told us, "they call my doctor when I need to see him."

We looked at three staff files and found these contained all the necessary documents to show that they were safe and suitable to work with vulnerable people. The quality of service provision was assessed and monitored. Where issues were identified improvements were made.