We carried out this unannounced inspection alongside a Mental Health Commissioner who focussed on detained patients. The Commissioners findings are available on the CQC website as a separate report.

We were able to talk to nine out of the 20 people resident on the day of our inspection. We were also able to speak to a relative who was visiting, numerous staff which included ancillary staff and managers.

People who used the service told us that they felt safe living at Woodleigh. One person said, “staff are good, they’re always there”.

All the paperwork that we looked at was up to date and relevant. People who used the service knew that they had care plans and what was written in them. People also had their own individual ‘recovery plans folder’; The folder contained copies of the persons own information.

People felt that they could express their views about the care they received and that they would be listened to. This was either via the weekly residents meeting, through individual key working sessions with staff or adding their own comments to the care plans. People told us that if they wanted to make a complaint, there was a form that was easily available for them to complete or, that they would talk to staff.

Two inspectors completed this unannounced inspection. We were able to speak to six out of the 23 people resident, numerous staff including ancillary staff, a relative and a stakeholder both visiting on the day of the inspection.

The people that we spoke to at Woodleigh Community were very satisfied with the care and support that they were receiving. Two individuals made a point of seeking us out to tell us how good the service was. One person said, “It’s the best placement I’ve been in” someone else told us that “Inmind (the provider) are a good team, staff are great”.

People felt that they could express their views about the care they were receiving and that they would be listened to. This was either via the weekly residents meeting, through individual key working sessions with staff or adding their own comments to the care plans. One comment we received was, “they give you independence and listen, they talk to you like an adult and not a patient.”

Staff were well trained and supported to undertake their work. In turn people who use the service spoke positively about the support that they received from staff. One relative told us, “couldn’t praise the staff enough”.

All the paperwork that we looked at was up to date and relevant. People who use the service knew what was written about them. Everyone had the option of keeping key documents for themselves in a ‘recovery folder’.

We rated Woodleigh Community independent Hospital as good because:

• During our last inspection the service did not meet the Department of Health guidance on same sex accommodation. During this inspection, we found the provider now met the same sex accommodation guidance and was successfully protecting the safety, privacy and dignity of patients.

• Staff promoted the recovery and wellbeing of patients through positive risk taking and the provision of individualised activities and outings. This helped to build patients’ confidence and skills to be able to manage in a less supported environment when they were ready to progress.

• Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and knew what to report as an incident. Incident data was regularly analysed. Staff reflected on individual incidents, and identified learning or changes to the service to prevent similar incidents reoccurring.

• Staff effectively managed and monitored patients physical health needs. Many staff had experience working in physical healthcare services. Specialised training to enable staff to manage patients with specific conditions, such as diabetes, was delivered by specialists.

• Staff members took ownership of their training needs. Multidisciplinary team members came together to share knowledge about specialist areas to upskill the whole staff team.

• Staff had a clear understanding of the individual needs of patients and knew their individual risks well.

• Staff morale was high. Staff were well supported by each other and the hospital manager. Staff were part of a cohesive multidisciplinary team and all members contributed equally to discussions about how the service should be run, regardless of their role.

• All staff took responsibility for audits. The system of audits was structured and organised. It gave the hospital manager comprehensive, accurate oversight of the service and assurance that it was delivering good quality services.

• Patients were always consulted with about decisions that needed to be made about the service and the way in which it operated.

• All patients were partners in their care and had a good understanding of their care plans.

However,

• The corporate senior management team at the In Mind hospital healthcare group were not visible to those working at the service.