The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Woodfield House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Woodfield Square, Harrogate, North Yorkshire, HG1 4LY (01423) 568728

Provided and run by:
North Yorkshire Council

All Inspections

1 March 2017

During a routine inspection

Woodfield House is a care home without nursing for up to 28 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. The home is arranged over two floors which can be accessed via a lift. The home has a garden which people can access and it is close to local amenities. At the time of our inspection 13 people lived at the service.

At the last inspection in January 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

We discussed with the registered manager and registered provider some areas of improvement we identified in relation to medicines, training records and the quality assurance system. The registered provider was keen to make such improvements. We saw the registered provider had worked to develop a new care plan system which would improve the records relating to risk assessment and mental capacity assessment for people. People and their families were positive about the leadership of the service.

We saw staff recruitment was safe which ensured candidates were suitable to support vulnerable people. Staff told us they received appropriate support to enable them to perform their role. We saw records to confirm this.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were happy with the choice of food they received and we observed a positive mealtime experience. People were supported to have access to healthcare support and their health needs were monitored well by staff.

People and their relatives told us they found staff to be caring, kind and friendly. We observed positive and warm interactions between staff and people who used the service. People were offered choices and were supported to maintain their independence.

People’s preferences were recorded in their care plans and staff were aware of these when delivering support. People had access to a wide range of activities, which included their own personal hobbies.

People, their families and members of staff had opportunities to provide feedback on the service and their views were listened to and acted upon. This meant the service was run in the best interests of the people who lived there.

27 January 2015

During a routine inspection

We undertook this unannounced inspection on the 27 January 2015. We last inspected Woodfield House on the 9 December 2013. At that inspection we found the home was meeting the regulations that were assessed.

Woodfield House is owned and managed by North Yorkshire County Council. The service provides residential care services for up to 28 older people, including specialist short term care for people living with dementia. The home has single bedrooms and there is disabled access into and throughout the home. The accommodation is set on two floors and there is a passenger lift serving all floors. There were several comfortable lounge and dining areas and the home provides a day centre. Woodfield House is located in a residential area near the centre of Harrogate.

The home employs a registered manager who had worked at the home for over twelve years. 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.

The service was safe. People we spoke with said they felt safe at the home. Staff were recruited safely and they were trained appropriately to be able to support people. People's medicines were managed safely.

Staff we spoke with understood how to make an alert if they suspected anyone at the home was at risk of abuse. Training had been given to staff about safeguarding procedures.

Safety checks were carried out within the environment and on equipment to ensure it was fit for purpose.

Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure that people’s rights were protected where they were unable to make decisions for themselves.

Staffing levels at the home were flexible to ensure people had the support they needed.

People were provided with nutritious food. Assistance and prompting was given by staff where necessary to assist people. Adapted cutlery and crockery were available to people for them to use to help maintain people’s independence.

Staff were seen to be attentive and kind to people and they respected people’s individuality, privacy and dignity.

Care plans were person centred and up to date however, they could be improved by adding more information about people’s personal histories. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing had been identified. These risks were being monitored and reviewed which helped to protect people’s wellbeing.

The service was well led. The registered manager had an effective quality assurance system in place which ensured that the home remained a safe place for people to live.

We received information from Healthwatch. They are an independent body who hold key information about the local views and experiences of people receiving care. CQC has a statutory duty to work with Healthwatch to take account of their views and to consider any concerns that may have been raised with them about this service. We also consulted the Local Authority to see if they had any concerns about the service, and none were raised.

9 December 2013

During a routine inspection

Some people were not able to tell us about their experiences. We therefore used a number of different methods to help us to understand the experiences of people, including observing the delivery of care. We spoke with seven people who lived at Woodfield House and four visitors. The comments from everyone were positive. These included, 'Staff here are excellent.' And, 'We are extremely well looked after. Nothing is too much trouble, you only have to ask and it's done.' Another person told us, 'It's lovely here.' The visitors we spoke with had no complaints.

We saw people looked well cared for and we noted some people had developed friendships since moving into the service. The atmosphere, throughout our inspection, was friendly and there was a lot of activity and light-hearted banter between everyone.

People had their privacy and dignity respected and were supported to make choices and influence how the service was delivered. We looked at people's care records. They included nutritional assessments and evidence that people's weight was monitored regularly. We saw that any concerns about people's welfare or specific care needs were discussed with the individual or their representative, or where necessary relevant healthcare professionals.

People told us the service was kept fresh and clean, and there were processes in place to minimise the risk of a spread of infection. We looked round all communal areas, some bedrooms and the laundry. We found the home to be clean, tidy and fresh smelling.

People told us the staff were very good and well trained. There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs during the day. However, when we asked people if there were enough staff they told us they felt that staffing levels during the night could be improved. Two people told us they had had to wait for attention to their continence and personal care needs during the night and that staff were not always available when they needed them. Despite this staff told us they felt supported by their colleagues and management of the home

The provider had systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. This included audits by the manager within the home and audits by the organisation.

21 November 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us that they were happy with the care they received. Comments included 'all very good actually, can't fault them' and 'everything's done to my liking.' We found that that people's ability to make decisions had been considered where this was appropriate and that people had been involved in making decisions about their care. We saw staff acting in kind and attentive ways and people looked clean and well cared for.

Staff were able to tell us about people's needs and the systems that were in place to make sure that people received the care they needed. Staff also knew how to recognise potential abuse and how to report any concerns they had. They had confidence in their management and felt that any concerns would be dealt with fairly. We also found that staff went through a thorough recruitment process before they started work in the home.

26 January 2012

During a routine inspection

People using the service told us that the staff were polite and helpful. They were always respectful and ensured they maintained peoples dignity. People explained how they could make choices about their daily lives, such as when they retired to or rose from bed.

Everyone told us there were offered the opportunity to attend activities in the day centre which is part of Woodfield House. Some told us about how much they had enjoyed the Christmas and New Year which had been organised in the home.

People told us they where satisfied with the care and support they received at Woodfield House, all told us they had 'no concerns' and could not think of anything they wanted improving.

Everyone we talked with made very positive comments about they staff. They told us the staff were 'very good' and they were treated 'well' by the staff.