Glenfield Woodlands is a residential care home that was providing personal care to 17 people at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

• People told us they felt safe living at Glenfield Woodlands.

• The risks to people had been assessed and people and where appropriate some relatives had been involved in compiling care plans. Relatives had asked for more input in reviewing plans which the registered manager was arranging. Staff were knowledgeable about the range of needs people had.

• People were supported with their medicines in a safe way.

• Appropriate recruitment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to work at the service. Training relevant to people’s support needs had been undertaken by staff. The staff team felt involved in the running of the home and were supported by the registered manager.

• People accessed healthcare services when they needed them, and they were supported to eat and drink enough to remain healthy.

• People were involved in making decisions about their care and support and their consent about the care and services offered was obtained. People were supported by a staff team who were kind and caring and treated them in a considerate and respectful manner.

• There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service being provided. People’s views of the service were sought through regular meetings, surveys and informal chats. A complaints procedure was in place and people knew what to do if they had a concern of any kind.

• The registered manager understood their roles and responsibilities as a registered person. They worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure people received care and support that was consistent with their assessed needs.

More information can be found in the detailed findings below.

Rating at last inspection: The home was rated Good at the last inspection in August 2017.

Why we inspected: This inspection was brought forward prompted in part by notification of an incident following which a person using the service sustained a serious injury

Follow up: We will continue to provide ongoing monitoring of this service.

The inspection took place on 16 and 17 August 2017, and the visit was unannounced.

Glenfield Woodlands provides residential care to older people. Glenfield Woodlands is registered to provide care for up to 17 people. At the time of our inspection there were 16 people living at the home.

The service was run by a company that was the registered provider. There was 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. In this report when we speak about both the company and the registered manager we refer to them as being, ‘the registered persons’.

At the last inspection on 11 November 2015 the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

At the last inspection we asked the provider to take action to ensure bedroom door locks were of a type that would ensure people could not be locked in their room accidently with no means of exiting. There had been improvements and some locks were removed, however there was a second type of lock that also required to be removed which was done on the day of our visit.

There were sufficient staff available to meet people’s personal care needs most of the time.

Staff were subject to a thorough recruitment procedure that ensured staff were qualified and suitable to work at the home. They received induction and on-going training for their specific job role, and were able to explain how they kept people safe from abuse. Staff were aware of whistleblowing and what external assistance there was to follow up and report suspected abuse.

Staff told us they had access to information about people’s care and support needs and what was important to people. Staff knew they could make comments or raise concerns with the management team about the way the service was run and knew these would be acted on.

People felt staff were kind and caring, and their privacy and dignity was respected in the delivery of care and their choice of lifestyle. Relatives we spoke with were complimentary about the staff and the care offered to their relatives. People were involved in the review of their care plan, and when appropriate were happy for their relatives to be involved. We observed staff offered people everyday choices and respected their decisions. Staff had access to people’s care plans and received regular updates about people’s care needs. Care plans included changes to peoples care and treatment, and people attended routine health checks.

People were provided with a choice of meals that met their dietary needs. Staff had a good understanding of people’s care needs, and people were able to maintain contact with family and friends as visitors were welcome without undue restrictions. There were sufficient person centred activities provided on a regular basis. People and their relatives felt they could raise any issues with the registered manager or staff.

The provider had a clear management structure within the home, which meant that the staff were aware who to contact out of hours. The provider undertook quality monitoring in the home supported by the registered manager and staff. The provider had developed opportunities for people to express their views about the service. These included the views and suggestions from people using the service, their relatives and health and social care professionals. We received positive feedback from the local authority with regard to the care and service offered to people. Staff were aware of the reporting procedure for faults and repairs and had access to the maintenance to manage any emergency repairs.

This inspection took place on 13 October 2015 and was unannounced.

Glenfield Woodlands is a care home that provides residential care for up to 17 people. The home specialises in caring for older people including those with people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 15 people in residence.

A manager was in post; however they have not yet registered with the CQC. The home has been without a Registered Manager since January 2015. The new manager has commenced the registration process now they have received the

People were happy and told us that they felt safe. Staff were able to explain how they kept people safe from abuse, and knew what external assistance there was to follow up and report suspected abuse. Staff were knowledgeable about their responsibilities and trained to look after people and protect them from harm and abuse.

Staff were recruited in accordance with the provider’s recruitment procedures that ensured staff were qualified and suitable to work at the home. We observed there to be sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs and worked in a co-ordinated manner.

Medicines were ordered, stored and administered safely.

Staff received an appropriate induction and on-going training for their job role. Staff had access to people’s care records and were knowledgeable about people’s individual needs, and those that were important to them.

People’s care and support needs had been assessed and people were involved in the development of their plan of care. People told us they were satisfied with the care provided.

People were provided with a choice of meals that met their dietary needs. There were drinks and snacks available throughout the day and night. The catering staff were provided with up to date information about people’s dietary needs. Staff communicated people’s dietary needs appropriately, which protected them from the risk of malnutrition.

People felt staff were kind and caring, and their privacy and dignity was respected in the delivery of care and their choice of lifestyle. Relatives we spoke with were also complimentary about the staff and the care offered to their relatives. We observed staff speak to, and assist people in a kind, caring and compassionate way. People told us that they had developed good relationships with staff.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s care needs. People were involved in the review of their care plan, and when appropriate were happy for their relatives to be involved. We observed staff to offer people everyday choices and respect their decisions.

People told us that they were able to maintain contact with family and friends as visitors were welcome without undue restrictions.

Staff told us they had access to information about people’s care and support needs and what was important to people. Care staff were supported and trained to ensure their knowledge, skills and practice in the delivery of care was kept up to date. Staff knew they could make comments or raise concerns with the management team about the way the service was run, and they were confident it would be acted on.

The provider had developed opportunities for people to express their views about the service. These included the views and suggestions from people using the service, their relatives and health and social care professionals.

Staff sought appropriate medical advice and support from health care professionals. Care plans included the changes to peoples care and treatment, and people were assisted to attend routine health checks.

People who used the service and their relatives spoke positively about the open culture and communication with the staff.

People were confident to raise any issues, concerns or to make complaints. People said they felt staff listened to them and responded promptly.

The provider had a clear management structure within the home, which meant that the staff were aware who to contact out of hours. Care staff understood their roles and responsibilities and knew how to access support. Staff had access to people’s care plans and received regular updates about people’s care needs.

There were effective systems in place for the monitoring of the building and equipment which meant people lived in an environment which was regularly maintained. Regular internal audits and monitoring of care planning ensured these were up to date.

Staff were aware of the reporting procedure for faults and repairs and had access to external contractors for maintenance and to manage any emergency repairs.

We spoke with two people who used the service and asked them whether in their view there were sufficient staff on duty to meet their needs in a timely manner. One person told us: “The staff here are lovely, they always have time for you and they’re their when I need them.” A second person said: “I like it here, I’ve been here a few months now and staff are always helpful.”

We arrived just after lunchtime and saw there were sufficient staff on duty to assist people from the dining room into the lounge. We also observed staff responding to people in a timely manner when they requested assistance by pressing the call bell.

We spoke with three people who used the services of Glenfield Woodlands. They told us they were happy with the care and support they received. We spoke with three visitors who were visiting relatives or friends on the day of our visit. They told us they were happy with the care provided and said there was good communication between staff at the service and themselves and that they were kept up to date about any changes to their relatives health or wellbeing.

We looked at the care plans and records of three people who used the service. We found people’s needs had been assessed and had been used to develop care plans which were regularly reviewed. Records showed people had accessed and were supported by a range of health care professionals. On the day of our visit we noted staff had little time to interact with people who used the service which was often limited to when personal care and support was provided. No activities or stimulation other than watching television were offered or provided to people during our visit, which took place in the afternoon and early evening.

We spoke with the chef who told us people were asked on a daily basis to make a selection from the menu as to the choice of meal for the following day. People we spoke with told us they were happy with the meals provided. Relative’s views as to the variety of meals available was mixed. We looked at the provision of food available which was adequate to meet the needs of people and included fresh fruit and vegetables.

Systems for determining staffing levels were not robust and the provider and registered manager could not evidence how staffing levels had been determined based on the needs of people who used the service. Staff had received training in topics related to the health and safety of people. However staff had not received training specific to the needs of people such as dementia awareness or other health related topics.

We spoke with three people who were in residence at Glenfield Woodlands. People told us they had enjoyed Christmas and in some instances told us about visits they had had from their relatives over the festive season. One person said: “I’m glad I’ve moved into here, I receive good care and the staff are friendly and helpful.”

We found the needs of people had been comprehensively assessed. Assessments had been used to develop care plans detailing the care and support people required and the role of staff in meeting people’s assessed needs.

Records were up to date and accurate and provided clear information as to people’s needs and their daily lives.

We spoke with one person who used the service they told us they were happy with the service they received and felt they were cared for by staff. We observed someone telling the senior carer on duty that they felt unwell and they would like a home visit by their doctor. The senior carer organised a visit for the person’s doctor for the following day.

We observed staff providing reassurance to people when they were confused and sitting with them talking about issues which were important to them. Staff regularly served drinks throughout the day to people using the service and visitors and encouraged people to engage in conversation. We spoke with two visitors who were visiting a relative or friend. They told us they were happy with the service their friend or relative received. One visitor said “They look after people well and they always make me feel welcome.”

Records showed a range of health care professionals were involved in the care of people using the service and their involvement was recorded. We found written records which are required to assess and record the care and support people needed were not always in place and in some instances had not been regularly reviewed. This had the potential for people not to receive the care and support they needed as staff did not have clear guidance as to the support people needed.

Staff recruitment procedures and training were robust and records were in place for the maintenance of the service and systems.

We spoke with three people about the care and support they needed and whether this was provided in a timely manner. People’s comments included: - “you never have to wait long, the girls are really good.” Whilst another person said “I like it here and I’m looked after well.”

One of the people we spoke with required care staff to use specialist equipment to move them from place to place within the home. They told us: - “Staff always use the hoist to help me between my bed and comfy chair.”

We spoke with a visitor who was visiting someone who uses the service. They told us they visited regularly and were very happy with the care and support provided. The person who they visited required care staff to use specialist moving and handling equipment. They told us they had no concerns about this and that staff always used the appropriate equipment.

We spoke with people who use the service about their day to day lives and experiences of residing at Glenfield Woodlands. They told us:-

I’ve not lived here long, but it’s much better than where I lived before. The staff here are really nice and I’m allowed to spend my day as I choose.”

“I can’t fault the staff here, and the manager is lovely. They listen to what I have to say and I make decisions about how I spend my time.”

“The work I did with Fourth Age is also on UTube and I now use the computer one day each week to stay in contact with family and friends.”

“All the food is homemade and really nice.”

Visitors we spoke with told us that they had helped their friend or relative choose Glenfield Woodlands because it was a small and friendly home, which felt homely. Visitors said that they were satisfied with the care and support their relatives and friends received and that they were confident to discuss with the manager and staff the care of their relatives and friends.

Visitors said that staff were always friendly and welcoming but that they felt additional staff were needed during busy times.

Care plans and records show that the needs of people were regularly reviewed and that people have access to a range of health care professionals who monitor the health needs of those in residence.

Staff received training which enables them to look after people well, and staff said that they feel supported by the management team. Staff told us that they had spoken to the management team about staffing numbers and had made them aware that in their view additional staff were needed to meet the needs of people in residence.