Redwood House

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We identified 1 breach of the legal regulations. There were continued shortfalls in the provider meeting regulatory compliance and we were not assured by the provider's governance arrangements relating to documentation and maintaining a safe and homely living environment. However, staff and managers had positive relationships.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

All the staff we spoke with told us there were good relationships among the staff team and with managers. A staff member told us that senior staff consulted with staff to review if any changes were needed to people’s care plans.

Although there was evidence of monthly meetings to gather people's views, we could not be assured of the accuracy of the provider's last satisfaction survey. The registered manager told us they would improve how they did this going forward. Our findings concerning people's religious and cultural dietary needs and people's needs and preferences not always being reflected in care plans meant there was an increased risk that staff could not work towards a shared direction to meet people's needs in this area.

The registered manager and staff told us the nominated individual regularly visited Redwood House and spent time talking with people. A staff member told us, “We have management that are really good and supportive of us.”

Our findings show continued shortfalls in meeting the legal regulations since the last inspection. Although actions were taken in response to our concerns, this resulted from our assessment identifying these concerns rather than the provider having identified and managed these independently.

All staff we spoke with felt they could approach the registered manager and provider with any concerns they had.

The provider’s whistleblowing policy was appropriate. This supported staff having the freedom to speak up. Staff knew where to find information on speaking up.

We did not receive any feedback of concern from staff and leaders in relation to workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. Staff we spoke with felt well supported by managers and the provider.

The provider's policies promoted workforce equality, diversity, and inclusion. There was also evidence of staff carrying out a cultural reflection tool that further promoted the values of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion.

Staff and leaders, we spoke to understood their roles and responsibilities. Staff also handled people’s confidential data appropriately and ensured personal documents were securely stored.

Governance arrangements were not always established or operated effectively by the provider. The environmental concerns, such as the risk of burns from water and hot surfaces, should have already been addressed, as the provider had documented that they had taken action to promote safety in these areas. We had limited assurance about the credibility of records that had been electronically signed. The same word-processed font with signer's names was used instead of signatures in documents such as people's care plans, staff records, and relatives' involvement in care planning. The registered manager told us they had started to do this in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, we found recently dated documents signed in this manner. These increased risks related to the deniability of receiving information in them.

Relatives confirmed they were kept informed and up to date. People also had support from advocates where there was an identified need.

The registered manager was receptive to our feedback during this assessment and transparent in sharing their planned improvements and actions with the local authority.

Records showed staff and leaders had worked with external professionals such as physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and social workers. This promoted people receiving joined-up care.

Staff told us they had time to complete training, which helped them develop their skills. Staff told us team meetings took place regularly, and we saw learning around incidents was discussed.

Our last inspection found that parts of the home looked poorly maintained. Although there was evidence that some areas had improved, areas such as the kitchen, communal bathroom, flooring in a person’s bedroom and peeling wallpaper in a hallway indicated that systems and processes to promote a homely living environment were still not operated effectively.