CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodlands Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, effective care, but the Safe rating Requires Improvement because some safety arrangements were not fully reliable.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 7 December 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, safety records, recruitment files and quality checks.
The home was clean and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff supported people with food, drinks and healthcare, and inspectors found good training, communication and management. People and relatives spoke positively about the care and said people felt safe and well cared for.
There were still safety concerns. Some radiator covers were loose, equipment near a fire exit needed better organisation, and some people and staff said there were not enough staff at busy times at night. Guidance for some as-required medicines was also missing, although the manager acted during the inspection.
The overall rating was Good. Safe remained Requires Improvement, while Effective and Well-led were Good. The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection and was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.
Kind and respectful care
People, relatives and professionals gave positive feedback about staff. They said people were happy, safe and well cared for.
“People, relatives and professionals all shared positive comments about the staff approach to care and told us they felt people were safe and well cared for.” from the report
Improved mealtimes
People received timely support with food and could eat where they wished. Staff made sure meals were available while hot and offered snacks and drinks during the day.
“At this inspection we found this had improved. Mealtimes were inclusive and people had the support they needed in a timely way.” from the report
Medicines system
The new electronic system alerted staff when medicines were missed. Inspectors found no gaps in the medicines records they checked.
“The system alerted staff to any medicine not given as prescribed. This meant action could be taken without delay to give people medicines in a timely way.” from the report
Better management oversight
Quality monitoring had improved since the previous inspection. Actions were recorded, monitored and followed through by the manager and provider.
“Actions identified were added to action plans. These were monitored by the registered manager and the provider to make sure they were completed.” from the report
Night staffing
needs fixingStaffing had increased since the previous inspection, but people and staff still reported that there were times when night staffing was not enough at peak periods.
“An additional member of staff had been added to the night staffing rota, however, staff told us during peak times this was still not enough.” from the report
As-required medicines guidance
seriousSome protocols explaining when and how to give as-required medicines were missing after records were moved to the electronic system. The manager started correcting this immediately.
“People prescribed 'as required' medicines did not always have protocols in place to give staff guidance.” from the report
Incomplete employment histories
minorThe recruitment checks reviewed had been completed, but some staff files did not contain a full employment history.
“Whilst those checks had been carried out, there was not always a full employment history obtained for all the files we reviewed.” from the report
- 01What has the review of night-time peak staffing found, and how will you make sure there are enough staff at those times?
- 02Have all radiator covers now been securely repaired, and how are fire exits and nearby storage checked?
- 03Have protocols for every person's as-required medicine been added to the electronic medicines system?
- 04What checks are now being made to ensure every staff file contains a complete employment history?
- 05Which current ratings for Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over from 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 January 2023 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
Woodlands Care Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care but concerns about night staffing, eating and drinking, records and management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 and 4 December 2018. One inspector spoke with six people, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care records, medicines, staffing, complaints, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for caring and responsive care. Inspectors saw compassionate interactions, respect for people's choices and dignity, personalised care plans, activities and support to access healthcare.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, and also for safe, effective and well-led care. Inspectors could not be assured that night staffing was sufficient or that people always received enough food and drink. Quality checks did not consistently identify and fix problems.
Medicines management had improved since the previous inspection and was no longer in breach. However, the provider breached Regulation 17 because confidential staff records were not always stored securely and governance systems were not consistently effective.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed compassionate interactions. Staff asked permission before helping people and supported privacy, dignity and choice.
“We observed positive and compassionate interaction between people and staff who consistently took care to ask permission before intervening or assisting.” from the report
Staff knew people well
Staff understood people's routines, preferences and ways of communicating. They used this knowledge to provide individual care.
“It was evident all staff knew all people well; for example, staff knew people's daily routines without referring to documentation.” from the report
Improved medicines management
The report says medicines arrangements had improved since the last inspection. Staff training, competency checks and medicines records were in place.
“Staff were trained to administer medicines safely and competency assessments were completed to ensure staff had learnt from the training.” from the report
Activities and personalised support
People took part in activities, and care plans contained important information about how to meet their needs.
“People participated in a variety of activities. We observed the activities coordinator engaging with people playing memory games.” from the report
Night staffing
seriousInspectors could not be assured that staffing at night was enough for people's needs, including moving and handling support and emergencies.
“We could not be assured people were provided with safe care at night.” from the report
Food and drink support
needs fixingTwo people were found asleep with meals left beside their beds, and inspectors could not be assured they had eaten enough. Food and fluid records also needed improvement.
“We could not be assured the two people concerned had received sufficient amounts of food.” from the report
Confidential records
seriousLists containing staff personal phone numbers were accessible in the office and dining area. The provider removed the lists during the inspection.
“The provider did not always support, maintain and respect staff confidentiality.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousThe home's governance systems did not consistently identify and improve problems with staffing, data protection and food and drink records.
“Governance systems were not consistently effective in recognising and driving improvement.” from the report
- 01How many care staff now work at night, and how do you check that this is enough for people who need two staff for moving and handling?
- 02How do you make sure people who are asleep or have a small appetite receive enough food and drink?
- 03How are food and fluid charts checked for accuracy and followed up when they are incomplete?
- 04What changes have been made to store staff personal information securely?
- 05What action has been taken in response to the Regulation 17 breach, and how is the provider checking that improvements are lasting?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at all five key questions, including care, staffing, medicines, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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 Woodlands Care Home
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.