Archived: Woodbridge House

Updated 28 March 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Woodbridge House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

During the inspection, we spoke with two people with limited verbal communication. People who lived at the service had complex needs and were not always able to tell us about their care and support. We observed staff interactions with people and observed care and support in communal areas to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We spoke with two support workers, one senior support worker, acting manager and the registered manager.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people's care records and health care records. We looked at three staff files including their recruitment and supervision records. We reviewed records relating to the management of the service, quality assurance records and a variety of policies and procedures implemented by the provider.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We received and reviewed the training data, records of activities, minutes of meetings and quality monitoring report for the service.

Updated 28 March 2020

About the service

Woodbridge House provides accommodation and personal care for up to 10 people aged between 18 and 65 years, who have a learning disability and autism. At the time of our inspection, the service was full. Woodbridge House is one of several small homes owned by Aitch Care Homes (London) Limited.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 10 people. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

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

People were safe at Woodbridge House. Staff knew their responsibilities in relation to keeping people safe from the risk of abuse. Risks were appropriately assessed and mitigated to ensure people were safe. Medicines continued to be managed well so people received their medicines as prescribed.

The provider continued to operate robust recruitment and selection procedures to make sure staff were suitable and safe to work with people. Staff received training, support and supervision to enable them to carry out their roles safely.

People's support plans clearly detailed their care and support needs. People and their relatives were fully involved with the care planning process. Care had been delivered in line with people’s choices. People received the support they needed to stay healthy and to access healthcare services. These were reviewed regularly. Staff supported people to maintain a balanced diet and monitor their nutritional health.

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.

Staff were kind and caring towards people. We observed people’s rights, their dignity and privacy were respected.

People knew how to complain and felt confident any concerns would be listened and responded to by the provider.

There was a positive leadership in the service. The service was well led by a management team who led by example and had embedded an open and honest culture. Staff worked in partnership with other agencies to provide consistent and effective care and support.

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 (published 05 April 2017).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

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.