Woodham House Bradgate

We found the following examples of good practice.

The provider had adapted the visitors’ protocol as government guidelines changed. Visitors were asked to complete a COVID-19 test, wear appropriate [personal protective equipment] PPE and follow hand hygiene procedures before entering the service.

The provider supported people to adhere to self-isolation guidelines when they had a positive COVID-19 test result. The provider had plans in place to ensure people could continue to access their local community safely during the pandemic.

The provider ensured there was an adequate supply of PPE and staff received ongoing infection control and prevention training. The registered manager made regular checks to ensure staff continued to use PPE appropriately.

The service was taking part in regular COVID-19 testing for people and staff in line with current government guidance.

The service was kept clean and hygienic. There were regular checks and audits of the service to ensure high standards of hygiene were maintained.

The provider had developed a range of risk assessments and contingency plans to mitigate the risks associated with the pandemic.

Woodham House Bradgate is a care home that provides care and support for people with mental health needs, learning disabilities, autistic people and those living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were three people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

We received mixed feedback from people and their relatives about how the provider was keeping them safe as there had been a recent missing person incident. Since the incident the provider had taken steps to reduce the risk of a similar occurrence happening again. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were managed well. People’s medicines were mostly managed safely. We have made a recommendation around ensuring directions for PRN (when required) medicines are clear for staff. There were adequate infection control processes in place. Staffing levels were sufficient to maintain people’s safety and ensure their needs were met.

The provider did not always meet their regulatory responsibilities as they had failed to inform us of specific changes to the service and other circumstances which we require providers to notify us about. We received positive comments about the overall management of the service. There were quality assurance systems in place to ensure care and support were kept to a good standard. The service worked with a range of healthcare and multidisciplinary professionals to achieve good outcomes for people.

People’s health and social care needs were assessed, and plans put in place to meet these. People were supported with their physical and mental health and care records contained good information on these. The provider met people's hydration needs. We have made a recommendation about how the provider can improve the way it supports people to maintain a balanced diet. 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’s communication needs were assessed, and information was available in a way that met people’s needs. People were offered regular activities to ensure they remained active and engaged. People were supported to keep in touch with their families. The provider supported people to document their preferences around their end of life.

People told us the registered manager and staff were kind and caring and knew people well. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who knew them well. People were supported to take part in elements of daily living, however we have made a recommendation about improving the way staff support people to maintain and develop daily living skills.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

This service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

Right support:

• Model of care and setting maximises people’s choice, control and independence. People were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care plan and risk assessments. Staff ensured people were supported to exercise choice and control on all aspects of their care and support.

Right care:

• Care is person-centred and promotes people’s dignity, privacy and human rights. People were happy with the care they received and told us they were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was maintained.

Right culture:

• Ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff ensure people using services lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives. People told us they were supported to engage in daily activities which were important to them.

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

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 17 March2018 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection to provide a rating. Whilst we were planning this inspection, we received information of concern related to a missing person incident which is currently under a separate safeguarding investigation.

We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at ongoing risk of harm from this concern. Please see the safe section of this full report.

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.