Woodside Court provides accommodation and support for up to ten people living with mental health needs. The home was providing a female only service to seven people at the time of this inspection.

At the last inspection in October 2016, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.

One person told us they liked staying at Woodside Court and said they felt safe living there. They told us they were not restricted and able to come and go as they pleased.

People were supported to have their health needs met. Staff at Woodside Court worked with other healthcare professionals and obtained specialist advice as appropriate. We saw that people’s prescribed medicines were being stored securely and managed safely.

There were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm and staff were aware of safeguarding procedures.

Staff received training which gave them the knowledge and skills to support people effectively. Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were asked for their consent to the care and support they received.

There was a system in place for dealing with people’s concerns and complaints. There were also systems in place to help ensure the safety and quality of the service provided.

The registered manager resigned their position at the time of our inspection. An acting manager was in post supported by a part time deputy manager.

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service in January 2016. A breach of legal requirements was found. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breach.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Woodside Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. Additionally we had received concerns in relation to medicines, food storage and the accommodation provided. As a result we used this focused inspection to look into those concerns.

We found improvements had been made to make sure that required statutory notifications were submitted to CQC about certain incidents and events. Notifications are information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.

People’s medicines were being stored securely and administered as prescribed.

The provider was taking action to improve the environment for people. Renovation of the property was taking place with some areas being re-decorated and new flooring being laid.

Improvements had been made to further enable people to take part in activities within the service or in the community and to develop their daily living skills.

Woodside Court is registered to provide accommodation and support for up to ten people living with mental health needs. The home was providing a female only service at the time of this inspection.

This inspection took place on 7 and 12 January 2016 and our first visit was unannounced. At our previous inspection in April 2014, we found the provider was meeting the regulations we inspected.

The service had 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.

People told us they felt safe living at Woodside Court and there were enough staff to support them.

They said that staff treated them with dignity and respect and their privacy was respected. There was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere on both days we visited.

We saw there were systems and processes to protect people from the risk of harm and staff were aware of safeguarding procedures. Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work.

People were supported to have their health needs met. Staff at Woodside Court worked well with other healthcare professionals to help make sure individual health needs were met. People’s medicines were managed safely. The systems in place to do this were well organised and regular audits took place to make sure that people were having their medicines as prescribed.

The service understood and complied with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were able to go out when they wanted and any restrictions in place for individuals were being managed appropriately.

Improvements were however found to be required in certain areas. The home was not consistently enabling people to carry out person-centred activities within the service or in the community and to develop their daily living skills. Records did not always show how individuals were involved in the development and on-going review of their support plans and how progress was monitored in helping them to achieve their set goals.

Required statutory notifications were not being submitted to CQC about certain incidents and events. Notifications are information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection visit, speaking with two people using the service, three staff members supporting them and from looking at care records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We found that arrangements for the management of medicines were safe. Administration records were maintained and medicines had been stored and disposed of safely. Staff received training and had their competency assessed before being allowed to administer medication.

Staff confirmed that they had received safeguarding training and records we saw supported this. Individual staff members we spoke with were all able to tell us the right action to take if they suspected abuse was taking place.

Is the service effective?

People’s assessed needs were being met by staff with the necessary skills and knowledge. Staff had access to training and supervision to help them do their jobs well.

Individual health and care needs were assessed and people were involved in reviewing their care plans. The use of more specific measurable actions within individual plans could however benefit people using the service to reach their set goals.

We saw that the service consulted other professionals when needed and kept the relevant care co-ordinators up to date with information about people.

Is the service caring?

People told us "I like it here", "The staff are nice" and "some of the staff are alright." People also said they were treated with dignity and respect. Staff we spoke with were positive about the service being provided saying "It's a good service", "we try to get them to be more independent" and "the clients are treated well here.".

We saw that people could be as independent as they wanted to be and were able to come and go from Woodside Court as they pleased. Assessments were undertaken and support was provided to individuals with their activities of daily living as required.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that the complaints procedure was clearly displayed in a ground floor communal area along with information about adult safeguarding and ensuring dignity in care.

Community meetings had taken place regularly with minutes available for February and April 2014. Further development of these regular forums may assist the service in ensuring that people were fully involved in the running of the home and able to see outcomes from their attendance.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a registered manager in post. Staff members we met were positive about the management support provided to them and felt able to approach senior staff should they have any issues .

We found that the home worked positively with other agencies and services to make sure that people received joined up care.

We spoke to four people using the service during the course our inspection. All told us staff treated them well and their privacy and dignity was respected. We spoke to two people about care planning. Both said they had care plans and they had been consulted about what was included in them. They said they met regularly with health care professionals and had one to one sessions with staff to discuss their care and treatment.

We spoke to two people about medication. Both said staff supported them to take their medications and one person told us staff reminded them when they needed to attend health care appointments.

We spoke to three people about the comfort of the home. Two people showed us their bedrooms which contained basic furniture and some personal items. Both said they were responsible for keeping their rooms clean and tidy. One person said it would be good to have some nice garden furniture so they could relax on sunny days like today.

We asked two people using the service what they would do if they had any complaints or concerns about the service. One person told us they did not know what they would do if they had to make a complaint. The other person told us they would tell a member of staff about their complaint and they were sure the member of staff would do something about it. When asked if they had been provided with a copy of or shown the homes complaints procedure both said they had not seen any procedure for dealing with complaints.

We spoke to one person who uses the service. They told us they attended regular residents meetings. They had a care plan and had regular one to one sessions with staff to discuss their care and treatment. Staff treated them well and their privacy and dignity was respected. They knew how to make a complaint if they needed to.

People’s comments about the home included ‘it’s good here’, 'I choose the meals', 'I make myself drinks when I want them', ‘I do what I want to do’ and 'the food is good' People told us they speak with staff about what they need and want, saying ‘staff help’ and ‘staff are good’. They said they feel safe, the home is always clean, they have all they need in their rooms and they have not needed to make a complaint.