Archived: Woodbank House

Throughout the observation we saw all staff treat people with respect and courtesy. We observed one particular staff member being very kind and supportive. We saw this staff member hold and touch one person who was distressed and this seemed to provide comfort and reassurance to the person.

The atmosphere in the home was generally relaxed, the TV was on but the volume was at an acceptable level.

Staff frequently smiled at people to offer reassurance and spoke clearly and at a steady pace with people.

Staff seemed generally comfortable when they were talking and interacting with people using the service.

We saw that people were well dressed in clean clothes.

In the main, people were offered drinks with their meal, although we had to intervene for one lady, as they were not given a drink with their sandwich at lunchtime. People were offered a choice of meal and an alternative if they didn't like either, which we saw a number of people do. People were offered a choice of where to sit, both in the lounges and the dining room.

We saw that plate guards were used to assist people in eating meals, where the guard had been assessed for and identified in their plan of care.

Staff sat with people assisting them to eat their meal. This was done discreetly and sensitively with staff speaking to people whilst assisting them to eat their lunch.

Whilst acknowledging the positive observations we observed the environment did not support people with dementia, in their care and welfare. This was because the environment did not reflect published research evidence and guidance issued by the appropriate professionals and expert bodies as good practice in relation to the care and treatment of people with dementia. For example, there was a clock in the lounge where the date was the 14 February 2012. People with dementia are disorientated to time and place and something as simple as incorrect dates can exacerbate this disorientation. There was little other information, if any, showing for example, the date, weather or a news event that would also help orientate people.

The home was not user friendly to help keep people orientated, for example, no bright doors to identify different areas such as bathrooms etc and tactile boards.

We will be holding a meeting with the provider for them to explain to us how they will improve the service and demonstrate their responsibility in meeting regulations established by the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

During our SOFI observation we saw that there were sufficient staff on duty, to meet people's assessed needs. Although it was busy around the lunchtime period, people's needs were attended to in a timely way.

We gathered people's views about the service from those people who were able to describe their experiences to us. They described the choices they made on a daily basis. This included the times they got up and went to bed and meals. One described how the staff treated them with respect, because they didn't speak to them like a child and that in fact they didn't speak to anyone like children.

One person told us they'd been to the dentist to 'sort their teeth out, as they were driving them mad'. They said, 'There's some things you like and others you don't, such as people banging on your door at night, but everyone seems to get on really.'

Another person told us how the nurse visits to dress their foot where they have an ulcer. They commented how they don't like it when people with senile dementia come wandering in at night when they're watching the television.

Everyone we spoke with said they felt safe living in the home. However, one person told us how some people have senile dementia and they always seem to come to you when there's no staff about.

One person said, 'There's some nice girls, but the men are good. They see to you if you're stuck.'

Everyone we spoke with thought there was enough staff.

We saw that a number of people were asleep. One person was in a positive mood, which was demonstrated by them talking to themselves and ourselves, clapping and rolling their skirt up and down. Four people were engaged in conversation between themselves, which also gave them a positive experience. Not all of those people had dementia. The TV was playing, but people did not appear to be watching it as staff changed what was being played and there was no objection.

There were times when we experienced shouting/confrontation indicating signs of distress from people without dementia, because of the behaviours of people with dementia. For example, one person was walking around repeating whether they could help, moving chairs, talking inappropriately about people eating their breakfast when they weren't and reading from the television, rather than watching and listening to it. We saw two people who didn't have dementia whilst waiting for a meal to be served, shouting at people with dementia not to sit with them.

We saw one member of staff enabling someone to help by giving them some serviettes to fold. This provided a positive experience for this person.

Staff did treat people with respect along with a well meaning and kind approach. We saw staff in the main, explaining what they were going to do when they needed to provide care for people, for example, asking someone to go with them to attend to their soiled clothing.

Our observations told us, in general, people looked cared for. They looked clean and wore clean clothing, indicating they had received a good standard of personal care and support.

We gathered people's views about the service from those people who did not have dementia. They described the choices they made on a daily basis. This included the times they got up and went to bed and meals. One said they had been asked if they wanted to move rooms. The same person said they liked to spend time in their room and knew the codes on the doors to be able to go to their room when they wished.

People's comments about the service included, 'It's alright', 'You get a bit bored on your own', 'Staff spend quite a bit of time with me', 'They have activities every so often, like singers, but I'm not bothered', We go out once in a blue moon', 'It's not bad here. We usually have a laugh', 'Nothing's too much trouble', 'It's clean. That's what I like about it', 'They do, do games', 'We do painting and now and again quizzes' and 'There's a bloke that comes and plays the accordion and sings'. One person said they would like to go out more.

They said staff were alright ' kind and respectful. They told us their relative's visit and are made to feel welcome.

Everyone we spoke with said they felt safe living in the home. One commented, 'Staff are alright. There's no swearing or shouting'.

People told us they thought staff were caring. One described how they had a buzzer to summon assistance, which was usually provided within 10 minutes. People's comments about staff included, 'They're alright. They leave me alone' and 'They're nearly all, alright'.

When we spoke to people they told us they'd no complaints. If they weren't happy, they said they would explain why to the manager, but they'd never had to do that. People said, 'I speak my mind', 'I give 'em a bit of a ' now and then' and 'If I'm not happy, I'd get one of gaffers'.