CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodbury Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and risks were assessed and monitored. Inspectors found some daily care notes lacked detail, and several medicine balance checks had not been documented correctly.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received appropriate healthcare support, staff had relevant training and mealtime arrangements had improved. This rating changed from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused inspection. The report says its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused inspection. The report says its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had accessible managers, regular feedback arrangements and systems to monitor quality and safety. People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management and culture.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Woodbury Court is rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 7 November 2022. Inspectors looked at Safe, Effective and Well-led because concerns had been raised about healthcare, staffing and personal care. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, observed care and checked records.
The home was rated Good in all three areas inspected. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, medicines were generally managed safely, staffing was monitored and infection control processes were in place. Staff were trained and people received appropriate healthcare support.
There were some shortfalls. Daily care notes did not always record the support given in enough detail, and some medicine balance checks were not documented correctly. Some relatives also felt there were fewer staff at weekends, although inspectors observed staff responding promptly and found no evidence that people were at risk of harm.
The overall rating remained Good, as the Caring and Responsive areas were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. The home had improved mealtime arrangements and its Effective rating changed from Requires Improvement to Good.
Prompt support
Inspectors observed staff responding promptly to people's needs, including at busy times. People and relatives generally said there were enough staff.
“During the inspection, we observed staff responding promptly to people's needs, even during busy times of the day.” from the report
Improved mealtimes
The home had introduced regular checks of mealtime experiences and used feedback to improve menus and support.
“The provider had implemented regular mealtime experience audits following the last inspection.” from the report
Staff training
Staff received an induction, role-relevant training and regular supervision. The manager tracked training and followed up when it was overdue.
“Staff completed a range of training relevant to their roles.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff described the management as accessible and supportive. The home offered several ways for people and relatives to give feedback.
“People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the culture and management of the service.” from the report
Healthcare support
The home responded to changing health needs and worked with healthcare professionals. Care plans recorded healthcare appointments and recommendations.
“People were supported to access appropriate healthcare support when needed.” from the report
Care records lacked detail
needs fixingSome daily notes did not clearly show the support people had received, and some interactions were not consistently recorded. The manager carried out an audit after the inspection.
“People's daily care notes did not always clearly evidence this support as some entries lacked detail” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingSeveral medicine stock balance checks were recorded incorrectly, although the stock held at the home was accurate. The provider held group supervision to review recording practice.
“During the inspection, we identified several balance checks which had not been correctly documented” from the report
Weekend staffing
minorSome relatives said there appeared to be fewer staff at weekends and that agency staff were sometimes used. The report says there was always someone on duty people knew.
“some relatives said there appeared to be less staff at weekends” from the report
- 01How do you make sure daily care notes record all the support and interactions each person receives?
- 02What checks now confirm that medicine stock balances are recorded correctly?
- 03How many staff are planned for each unit at weekends, and how do you cover sickness?
- 04How often are agency staff used, and how do you make sure they know each person's needs?
- 05What were the previous Caring and Responsive ratings, and what improvements have been made since they were last assessed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 November 2022 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, December 2020
Woodbury Court was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 response.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 23 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the response to coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, supported testing, followed shielding and social distancing rules, managed visitors safely and kept its infection control policy up to date.
The home had a separate, protected area for family visits. Staff had clear PPE guidance and were checked on putting on and removing PPE and on hand hygiene.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a standard rating for the five questions.
Safe family visits
The home created a separate COVID-19 secure area where families could meet safely. Visitors used a separate entrance and had their temperature checked and recorded.
“The registered manager and provider had created a separate area of the home where families could meet with people safely, in a COVID-19 secure area.” from the report
PPE guidance and checks
Staff had clear, easy-to-read PPE instructions. Their skills in putting on and removing PPE and carrying out hand hygiene were checked.
“The registered manager undertook competency assessments of staff "donning and doffing" PPE and hand hygiene.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had good infection prevention and control arrangements, including PPE, testing and outbreak management.
“We were assured that this service met good infection prevention and control guidelines” from the report
Further development identified
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not explain what specific improvement was needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What changes did you make after inspectors signposted resources to develop your infection control approach?
- 02How are staff currently checked on putting on and removing PPE and on hand hygiene?
- 03How do you currently manage visits from families and protect people from infection?
- 04How do you provide PPE for people who have COVID-19 or another infection?
- 05How do you access testing for people using the service and staff?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four question areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 December 2020 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 Woodbury Court
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Gooddown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2018Outstandingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 December 2010.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.