CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodcock Dell Avenue
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about the home's infection prevention and control arrangements. They found effective use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning, visiting procedures and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection, although inspectors noted that personalised visiting and contact with relatives were supported.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and visiting arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to eight people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. Seven people were living there when inspectors visited.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected the service.
Inspectors found up-to-date infection control procedures, regular checks, enough protective equipment, testing, safe visiting arrangements and a clean home. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full quality rating.
Infection control checks
The provider carried out detailed infection control audits and acted promptly when they found shortfalls.
“The provider completed comprehensive IPC audits, and any shortfalls were promptly addressed.” from the report
Protective equipment
The home monitored its supplies of masks, gloves and aprons and had arrangements to reduce the risk of supplies running out.
“A tracker system was in place which closely monitored the PPE stock levels and identified when PPE stocks were low.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home very clean, with frequent cleaning of high-touch surfaces. Relatives also spoke positively about cleanliness.
“The home was very clean. Frequent cleaning of high touch surfaces was carried out.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home supported personalised visits, including visits during outbreak procedures. People could also keep in touch through calls, video calls and letters.
“Personalised visiting was supported by the home. Management knew how important visits were to people's well-being and emotional needs.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently manage COVID-19 or other infection outbreaks?
- 02How do you check that staff are following infection prevention and control procedures?
- 03How do you monitor supplies of protective equipment and what happens if supplies become low?
- 04How are visits arranged now, including visits during an outbreak?
- 05What measures are in place when COVID-19 causes staffing pressures?
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 five-question ratings were not given. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 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, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some records and safety checks needing improvement.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 19 December 2018. One inspector reviewed care and staff records, policies, audits and information held by the CQC. They also observed care and spoke with managers, staff, a relative, other relatives after the visit and a healthcare professional.
The home supported up to eight people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. All eight places were occupied. Inspectors found that people were treated with dignity and respect, and that staff understood their needs, communication methods, health needs and preferences.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same as the previous inspection. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns, but identified some areas where records, safety checks and communication should be improved.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness and respect. Relatives also gave positive feedback about the care.
“Staff were observed to engage with people using the service in a kind and respectful manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences and routines. Staff knew how to support people in individual ways.
“People's care plans were personalised. They included information about people's individual needs, preferences and routines.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in a wide range of activities, including shopping, swimming, music therapy, sports and community visits.
“People participated in a range of activities, which included accessing community facilities and amenities.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found suitable recruitment checks, flexible staffing and training that helped staff meet people's needs.
“Staff recruitment procedures supported the employment by the service of suitable staff with appropriate abilities to provide people with the care and support that they needed.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were generally stored, administered and recorded safely. Staff had training and their competence had been checked.
“People's medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Pain medicine records
needs fixingOne person's record did not explain the pain experienced, and there was no protocol for giving the medicine when needed. The manager said this would be addressed.
“However, the person's MAR did not include a record from staff of details of the pain that the person experienced.” from the report
Temperature checks
needs fixingSome fridge, freezer and hot water temperatures were outside the safe range. Records did not show that staff had recognised the issue or acted on it.
“There was no indication from records that staff had acknowledged the shortfalls and taken action to address them.” from the report
Health records
needs fixingOne record was undated and inaccurate. Seizure records had not been regularly reviewed for patterns, trends and triggers.
“Also, records did not show that people's seizure records had been regularly reviewed to identify any patterns, trends and triggers.” from the report
Accessible care plans
minorPeople's communication needs were recorded, but care plans were in written format. The manager said the home would look at making this information easier for people to access.
“However, people's care plans were in written format.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to record pain, including when and where pain happens, and to use the required as-needed medicine protocol?
- 02How are fridge, freezer and hot water temperatures checked now, and how are problems recorded and followed up?
- 03How are seizure records reviewed for patterns, trends and triggers?
- 04How can each person access their care plan in a format they understand, such as pictures or other communication methods?
- 05What has been done to improve communication about people's needs and activity goals?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and the ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 February 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 Woodcock Dell Avenue
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Brent
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. 74 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
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.