CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodlands Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Risk assessments, staffing levels, recruitment checks and medicines systems were satisfactory. Inspectors noted incidents that had affected people's safety, although the home was taking action and seeking extra support.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff worked with health professionals. However, professionals said staff practice had sometimes been inconsistent and not all advice had always been followed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed treating people with patience, kindness, dignity and respect. Relatives said staff communicated well and had people's best interests at heart.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed, regularly reviewed and adapted to people's changing needs. Activities were available, although the range was limited by some people's physical health, frailty and the need for careful staffing.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home had audits, action plans and senior management oversight. However, frequent management and staff changes had caused uncertainty, and improvements had not always been sustained.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but leadership and staff stability still needed improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 11 July 2019. They observed care, spoke with relatives, staff and health professionals, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, audits and other records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. People had suitable care plans, appropriate staffing, safe medicines systems and support from health professionals. Staff were observed to be patient, respectful and attentive. The home supported people with learning disabilities to have choice, communication and meaningful activities.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. There had been several changes in managers and staff, and the acting manager was not yet registered with CQC. Inspectors also found that some staff did not consistently follow guidance about autism, positive behaviour and communication. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
Safe staffing
Staffing levels were judged suitable for people's needs, including one-to-one support. Agency staff helped maintain staffing levels while the permanent team changed.
“Staffing levels were observed to be appropriate to the needs of people using the service.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were administered by trained staff and checked through handovers and audits. Errors had reduced after stronger processes were introduced.
“People received their medicines as intended and there were enough qualified and competent staff to administer medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff engaging positively with people and helping to reduce distress. Staff knew people's preferences and supported them respectfully.
“Our observations of staff were positive, and we observed staff engaging with people regularly and in a way which helped to enhance people's wellbeing and minimise any distress.” from the report
Detailed care planning
Care plans included communication information, health needs, risks and daily routines. Families were regularly consulted about care.
“People's care and support plans were detailed and informative.” from the report
Management stability
needs fixingThe home had experienced several manager changes and the acting manager was initially expected to stay for only up to six months. The acting manager had applied for CQC registration but was not registered at the inspection.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
Safety incidents
seriousSeveral incidents had affected people's safety, particularly because some people could not move out of the way. The home was working with funding authorities and other professionals to reduce the risk.
“A recent number of incidents in the service had affected the safety of others.” from the report
Staff knowledge and consistency
needs fixingSome staff had not received all the role-specific training they needed. Inspectors found that guidance about autism, sensory processing, positive behaviour and communication was not followed consistently.
“Not all staff had sufficient understanding of autism and sensory processing because training and guidance provided by health care professionals had not been accessed by all staff.” from the report
Limited activities
minorPeople had activities and opportunities inside and outside the home, but the range was restricted by some people's physical health and frailty. Activities also needed careful advance planning around staffing.
“The scope of activities was somewhat limited due to some people's physical health and frailty.” from the report
- 01Who is the registered manager now, and how long has the current management team been in post?
- 02How do you check that every staff member understands each person's autism, sensory processing, positive behaviour and communication guidance?
- 03What incidents have occurred since this inspection, and what changes have been made to keep people safe?
- 04How do you maintain consistent staffing and reduce reliance on agency staff?
- 05What activities are currently available, and how do you make sure people can take part when staffing or health needs make planning difficult?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions; the overall rating improved from the previous inspection, while Well-led remained Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 July 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and effective care, but problems with cleaning, care records and management stability.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 31 May and 1 June 2018. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, checked three care plans and three staff files, and reviewed other records.
The home was rated Good for effective care and for caring. Staff were trained, understood people's communication, supported choice and independence, and provided kind and respectful care. People had enough staff, safe medicine support and access to healthcare.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for safe, responsive and well-led care. Inspectors found missing cleaning schedules, infection control problems, outdated information in some care plans, limited support for some personal interests, and many changes in managers and staff. The previous medicines breach had been addressed.
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well, listened to them and supported their dignity, privacy and independence.
“We saw that staff cared for and supported people in a kind and compassionate way.” from the report
Trained staff
Staff received relevant training, including training about people's health conditions, medicines and first aid.
“Staff received specific training about the complex health conditions that people lived with to help them do their jobs more effectively” from the report
Safe medicines support
The previous medicines problem had been corrected. Staff had their medicines skills checked and medicines were regularly monitored.
“People were supported to take their medicines by staff that was properly trained and had their competency assessed.” from the report
Choice and involvement
Staff sought consent and used different ways to understand people's wishes. People and relatives were involved in care decisions.
“Throughout our inspection, we saw that, wherever possible, staff sought to establish people's wishes and obtain their consent before providing care and support.” from the report
Cleaning and infection control
needs fixingThere was no cleaning schedule. Inspectors found stained flooring, a rusty bathroom fitting and mops stored or used incorrectly.
“However, we found there was no cleaning schedule in place to ensure all areas of the home were cleaned regularly.” from the report
Outdated care plan information
needs fixingWhen people's needs changed, old information was not always removed. This could make written guidance inaccurate, although staff knew the correct information.
“This meant that the information in the care plan was not always correct.” from the report
Personal interests and goals
needs fixingSome people were supported with activities and community outings, but their own interests and goals were not always explored or developed.
“We found that staff did not always explore people individual interests.” from the report
Management changes
needs fixingThe home had experienced many changes in managers and staff. A manager was applying to register, but the provider planned to appoint a permanent manager.
“We found there had been many changes to staff and managers in a short period.” from the report
Fire safety checks
needs fixingWeekly fire checks were not always completed, and one staff member did not know how to turn off the alarm after the system had changed.
“However, we noted that weekly fire checks were not always completed.” from the report
- 01What has been done to introduce and maintain a cleaning schedule and fix the flooring and other infection control problems?
- 02How do you make sure old information is removed from care plans immediately after a person's needs change?
- 03How are each person's interests and goals recorded, supported and reviewed?
- 04Who is the registered manager now, and how has management stability improved since this inspection?
- 05How are weekly fire checks completed and how are staff told about changes to the fire alarm system?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, using observations, conversations, care plans, staff files and other service records. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 July 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Woodlands Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 October 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.