We carried out a review of the data available to us about Woodside Court on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Woodside Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Woodside Court is a residential care home providing personal care to up to ten people. The service provides support to people with mental health needs in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection there were nine people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The provider managed risks to the premises with a range of checks such as those relating to fire, electrical, gas and water safety. Risks relating to people’s care, such as those relating to their mental health, were also assessed and clear guidance was in place for staff to follow to reduce the risks. People’s medicines were managed safely by staff. There were enough staff and staff were recruited through procedures to check they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Staff understood how to safeguard people from abuse and neglect.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff received training and support to understand and meet people’s needs. People received food of their choice. People were supported to maintain their physical and mental health.
People liked the staff and developed good relationships with people. Staff understood people’s needs including those relating to their gender, sexuality and cultural backgrounds. People were treated with dignity and respect and were encouraged to maintain their independent living skills. The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of care provided although they were not always as effective as they needed to be.
The registered manager notified CQC of significant events, such as allegations of abuse, as required by law. The registered manager and staff understood their role and responsibilities. The provider communicated openly with people and staff through regular meetings and surveys. Staff felt well supported by the registered manager. The provider undertook checks to monitor, review and improve the quality and safety of the service and addressed any issues found promptly.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the Care Quality Commission (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (report published November 2019).
Why we inspected
The inspection took place on 2 August 2022. This was a planned inspection to check the service had improved since our previous inspection.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Woodside Court is a ‘care home’ which accommodates up to ten people with mental health needs in one adapted building. At the time of the inspection, there were eight females using the service. Woodside Court is located on a residential road in South Norwood.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Some aspects of the premises were not safe. We saw that at least two large windows on the first floor of the home were not restricted. This posed an obvious risk to people of falling from a window. The provider's audits had not identified this.
People were satisfied with the quality of care they received. Their needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. People received care and support from a consistent staff team who were trained and knowledgeable in the care and support people required. Staff treated people as individuals and respected their privacy and lifestyle choices.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were actively involved in decisions about their care and support.
People were protected from the risk of abuse and felt safe. All incidents involving people were appropriately reported, reviewed and used to improve practice. People knew how to make a complaint and the provider had an appropriate system in place to record
People were supported to maintain their mental and physical health. The registered manager and staff worked well with external healthcare providers to make sure that people received consistent care which met their needs. The provider and staff were following national guidance for the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines. People received their medicines when they were due.
The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of care provided although they were not always as effective as they needed to be.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (report published April 2017).
Why we inspected
The inspection took place on 15 October 2019. This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. We found that the provider needed to make improvements and we found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Please see the Safe and Well-led sections of this full report. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.
Follow up
We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve and maintain the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At the last inspection in October 2016, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
The service demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.
One person told us they liked staying at Woodside Court and said they felt safe living there. They told us they were not restricted and able to come and go as they pleased.
People were supported to have their health needs met. Staff at Woodside Court worked with other healthcare professionals and obtained specialist advice as appropriate. We saw that people’s prescribed medicines were being stored securely and managed safely.
There were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm and staff were aware of safeguarding procedures.
Staff received training which gave them the knowledge and skills to support people effectively. Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were asked for their consent to the care and support they received.
There was a system in place for dealing with people’s concerns and complaints. There were also systems in place to help ensure the safety and quality of the service provided.
The registered manager resigned their position at the time of our inspection. An acting manager was in post supported by a part time deputy manager.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Woodside Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. Additionally we had received concerns in relation to medicines, food storage and the accommodation provided. As a result we used this focused inspection to look into those concerns.
We found improvements had been made to make sure that required statutory notifications were submitted to CQC about certain incidents and events. Notifications are information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.
People’s medicines were being stored securely and administered as prescribed.
The provider was taking action to improve the environment for people. Renovation of the property was taking place with some areas being re-decorated and new flooring being laid.
Improvements had been made to further enable people to take part in activities within the service or in the community and to develop their daily living skills.
This inspection took place on 7 and 12 January 2016 and our first visit was unannounced. At our previous inspection in April 2014, we found the provider was meeting the regulations we inspected.
The service had a registered manager 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.
People told us they felt safe living at Woodside Court and there were enough staff to support them.
They said that staff treated them with dignity and respect and their privacy was respected. There was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere on both days we visited.
We saw there were systems and processes to protect people from the risk of harm and staff were aware of safeguarding procedures. Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work.
People were supported to have their health needs met. Staff at Woodside Court worked well with other healthcare professionals to help make sure individual health needs were met. People’s medicines were managed safely. The systems in place to do this were well organised and regular audits took place to make sure that people were having their medicines as prescribed.
The service understood and complied with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were able to go out when they wanted and any restrictions in place for individuals were being managed appropriately.
Improvements were however found to be required in certain areas. The home was not consistently enabling people to carry out person-centred activities within the service or in the community and to develop their daily living skills. Records did not always show how individuals were involved in the development and on-going review of their support plans and how progress was monitored in helping them to achieve their set goals.
Required statutory notifications were not being submitted to CQC about certain incidents and events. Notifications are information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
We found that arrangements for the management of medicines were safe. Administration records were maintained and medicines had been stored and disposed of safely. Staff received training and had their competency assessed before being allowed to administer medication.
Staff confirmed that they had received safeguarding training and records we saw supported this. Individual staff members we spoke with were all able to tell us the right action to take if they suspected abuse was taking place.
Is the service effective?
People's assessed needs were being met by staff with the necessary skills and knowledge. Staff had access to training and supervision to help them do their jobs well.
Individual health and care needs were assessed and people were involved in reviewing their care plans. The use of more specific measurable actions within individual plans could however benefit people using the service to reach their set goals.
We saw that the service consulted other professionals when needed and kept the relevant care co-ordinators up to date with information about people.
Is the service caring?
People told us "I like it here", "The staff are nice" and "some of the staff are alright." People also said they were treated with dignity and respect. Staff we spoke with were positive about the service being provided saying "It's a good service", "we try to get them to be more independent" and "the clients are treated well here.".
We saw that people could be as independent as they wanted to be and were able to come and go from Woodside Court as they pleased. Assessments were undertaken and support was provided to individuals with their activities of daily living as required.
Is the service responsive?
We saw that the complaints procedure was clearly displayed in a ground floor communal area along with information about adult safeguarding and ensuring dignity in care.
Community meetings had taken place regularly with minutes available for February and April 2014. Further development of these regular forums may assist the service in ensuring that people were fully involved in the running of the home and able to see outcomes from their attendance.
Is the service well-led?
The service had a registered manager in post. Staff members we met were positive about the management support provided to them and felt able to approach senior staff should they have any issues .
We found that the home worked positively with other agencies and services to make sure that people received joined up care.
The provider sent us an action plan on the 8th of August 2013. They said they had revised the organisations complaints policy and the complaints procedure was clearly displayed at the home. They said the manager would monitor complaints monthly, and the business manager would monitor any learning from complaints.
At our last inspection we found that the registered provider had failed to notify the Care Quality Commission about incidents which were reported to the police.
The provider sent us an action plan on the 8th of August 2013. They said they had revised the organisations policy on events reportable to Care Quality Commission. They said the manager and business manager would monitor compliance with this regulation monthly and annually.
We spoke to two people about medication. Both said staff supported them to take their medications and one person told us staff reminded them when they needed to attend health care appointments.
We spoke to three people about the comfort of the home. Two people showed us their bedrooms which contained basic furniture and some personal items. Both said they were responsible for keeping their rooms clean and tidy. One person said it would be good to have some nice garden furniture so they could relax on sunny days like today.
We asked two people using the service what they would do if they had any complaints or concerns about the service. One person told us they did not know what they would do if they had to make a complaint. The other person told us they would tell a member of staff about their complaint and they were sure the member of staff would do something about it. When asked if they had been provided with a copy of or shown the homes complaints procedure both said they had not seen any procedure for dealing with complaints.