CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodbury Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, PPE, testing, safe admissions, visiting arrangements and managing outbreaks. The provider also said it had measures to reduce the risks linked to COVID-19 staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Woodbury Manor was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and visiting arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 22 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether staffing pressures affected people.
Inspectors were assured that visitors, new admissions and people living in the home were protected from infection. Staff used personal protective equipment, took part in testing and had infection control training.
The home had arrangements for COVID-19 outbreaks, including separate areas, staff working in different zones and a separate room for putting on and removing protective equipment. Visitors could maintain relationships through appointments, a visiting pod and visits in people's rooms.
The service was inspected but not rated. The report does not give ratings for the other four areas of care, so this inspection should not be read as a full assessment of the home.
Visiting arrangements
People could keep in touch with important relationships. The home used a visiting pod, appointments and visits in people's rooms, with PPE provided when needed.
“There were no restrictions on visiting and the registered manager told us the appointments system worked well to ensure people were kept safe.” from the report
COVID-19 outbreak controls
The home had separate areas for people with COVID-19 and prevented staff from working across areas during outbreaks to reduce the risk of infection spreading.
“When there was an outbreak, staff did not work across areas to prevent cross infection.” from the report
PPE and staff training
Staff used PPE appropriately and had training in infection control, COVID-19 and using PPE. Changes in guidance were shared through handovers and meetings.
“Staff had received training around infection control, COVID-19 and using PPE correctly.” from the report
Safe admissions
New referrals had checks and COVID-19 tests before moving in. New residents completed a short isolation period and were supported by staff during it.
“There were safe systems in place to assess and admit new referrals.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control and visiting arrangements are in place now, and how have they changed since the inspection?
- 02How would you manage a COVID-19 outbreak now, including separating residents and staff?
- 03How are current staffing pressures affecting people's care and daily routines?
- 04What checks, tests and isolation arrangements would apply if my relative moved in?
- 05How do you keep relatives updated if government or infection control guidance changes?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 March 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 2019
Woodbury Manor was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection. Inspectors visited on three dates and spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files, risk assessments, training records and quality checks.
The inspectors found that people were protected from harm and that medicines were safely managed. Staff understood safeguarding and risk management. The home had enough familiar staff, with no agency staff being used.
People received personalised care and were involved in decisions about their support. Inspectors found good choices around food, healthcare, activities, communication, privacy and end of life care. The home was also found to have effective leadership, audits and feedback arrangements.
All five ratings were Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection rating was also Good, published on 21 February 2017.
Safe medicines
Medicines were checked, recorded and administered safely. Staff had training and regular competency assessments.
“Medicine administration records showed people received their medicines safely and on time.” from the report
Familiar staff
The home did not use agency staff, and many staff had worked there for a considerable time. This supported consistency and familiarity for people.
“Many of the staff that worked at the home had been there for a considerable time.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's preferences, life histories and dementia-related needs. People and relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“People's care plans were in-depth and person centred.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could choose from a wide range of activities, outings and events. Inspectors saw people engaged and stimulated during activities.
“People had access to a wide range of activities and were regularly consulted in what they wanted to do.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People, relatives and healthcare professionals gave positive feedback about staff. Inspectors observed kind, compassionate and dignified interactions.
“Throughout the inspection we observed staff treated people in a kind and compassionate manner.” from the report
Strong oversight
Managers used audits, action plans, meetings and surveys to monitor care and act on issues. Staff said they understood the management structure and felt listened to.
“There was a clear and effective management structure in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you use the monthly dependency checks to make sure staffing levels still match people's needs?
- 02How are activities chosen for people living with dementia, and how do you record whether activities are meaningful to them?
- 03How will relatives be involved in reviewing care plans and end of life wishes?
- 04How often are medicines audits and staff competency assessments completed, and what happens if an issue is found?
- 05How do you act on feedback from residents' meetings, family meetings and surveys?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 December 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.
Every inspection of Woodbury Manor
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Enfield
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Over the time he spent with them he got to know our parents very well and became like part of the family, even joining in family celebrations.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.