CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Woodlands Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including admissions, PPE, testing, hygiene and outbreak management. The provider also had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found safe infection control, clean surroundings and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 31 May 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, visiting arrangements and any staffing pressures.
Inspectors found safe processes for admissions, testing, PPE, hygiene and managing outbreaks. They were assured that the home was following shielding and social distancing rules and that its infection control policy was up to date.
The home was clean and hygienic. Safe visiting was being supported, including plans to allow weekend visits, although indoor visiting was suspended during a COVID-19 outbreak except in exceptional circumstances.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for the five areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors found safe processes for admissions and infection prevention. The provider's infection control policy was up to date.
“We found safe processes were in place and appropriate action had been taken.” from the report
PPE and supplies
Staff were seen using PPE safely, and inspectors confirmed that sufficient supplies were available.
“During our visit we observed the staff using Personal Protective Equipment, (PPE) safely.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and hygienic, with cleaning schedules, PPE stations and regular checks.
“The home was clean and hygienic. This was an old building however cleaning schedules were in place and PPE stations located on each floor.” from the report
Family visiting
The home used computer systems and video calls to help people stay in touch with relatives. It was also introducing weekend visiting in line with guidance.
“Social media systems such as computer systems and 'face time' access was used to facilitate contact between people and their relatives.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What staffing pressures are affecting the home now, and how are you managing them?
- 02What are the current visiting arrangements, including weekend visits?
- 03What happens to family visits if there is a COVID-19 outbreak?
- 04How often are cleaning, hygiene and infection control checks carried out, and what happens if an issue is found?
- 05How do you safely admit new residents and manage testing and infection risks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 June 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, October 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but the Safe rating was Requires Improvement because some safety records and checks were not reliable enough.
This was an unannounced inspection on 16 and 19 September 2019. Inspectors spoke with five people, four relatives and 11 staff. They observed care and checked care, medicine, staffing and management records.
People generally felt safe and positive about the care. Staff were described as kind and familiar, and inspectors found enough staff, personalised care, good activities and effective support from health professionals.
The Safe question was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found gaps in safeguarding reporting, records of checks for people nursed in bed, information about allergies, topical medicine instructions and some infection-control and cleaning issues. The other four questions were rated Good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw a friendly, welcoming atmosphere and positive interactions.
“There was a welcoming and homely feel to the home.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, histories and individual support needs. Staff respected choices about daily routines.
“Care plans were in place for each person and contained personalised and detailed information about the way people liked to be supported.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People had a range of activities and entertainment, including outings. Relatives could visit without restriction and said they felt welcome.
“Two activity coordinators were employed and planned a range of activities and entertainment.” from the report
Active management of improvements
The provider had made changes to the building, dining experience and staff systems. Inspectors found audits and action plans to monitor further improvements.
“Robust audits were in place and were effective at identifying improvements within the home.” from the report
Some safeguarding reporting was missed
seriousOne concern was handled as an internal complaint instead of being reported to the local authority. The provider said this was an oversight.
“in one case concerns had been addressed as an internal complaint but had not been reported to the local authority.” from the report
Topical medicine instructions were unclear
needs fixingRecords for creams and ointments did not clearly tell staff where or when to apply them. New documentation was introduced during the inspection.
“records in relation to topical medicines such as creams and ointments did not provide staff with clear guidance about where or when to apply creams.” from the report
Some infection-control issues
needs fixingThe home was generally clean, but inspectors found a couple of unpleasant-smelling areas. Cleaning had also been affected by staff absences.
“The home was generally clean; however, we noted a couple of malodorous areas .” from the report
- 01How are wellbeing checks now recorded for people who cannot use their call bell?
- 02How do you make sure every staff member knows about each person's allergies and other important risks?
- 03How are creams and ointments recorded, including exactly where and when they should be applied?
- 04What action has been taken to prevent missed safeguarding referrals to the local authority?
- 05Have the unpleasant-smelling areas and cleaning problems caused by staff absences been resolved?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that considered all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 October 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 Woodlands Care Centre
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 September 2018.
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 Cheshire East
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. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.