CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodlands
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including testing, personal protective equipment, admissions, cleaning, social distancing and visitor arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Woodlands was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 infection prevention and visiting arrangements.
The inspection took place on 31 March 2021 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control. They found that people were admitted safely, visitors were checked, protective equipment was available and cleaning and social distancing measures were in place.
The home was recorded as inspected but not rated. The report gives a view of infection control arrangements only, rather than a full quality rating for the home.
Safe admissions and testing
New arrivals were isolated for 14 days. People and staff took part in whole-home COVID-19 testing, with daily testing for staff.
“People were admitted to the home safely and isolated for 14 days after their arrival.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors completed health checks, had their temperatures checked and were asked to take a COVID-19 test before visiting inside.
“Visitors were asked to complete a health form and had their temperatures checked.” from the report
Protective equipment and cleaning
Protective equipment was readily available. Inspectors also saw regular cleaning of touch points and measures to support social distancing.
“The service had good supplies of PPE that were readily available in stations throughout the service.” from the report
Safe family contact
The home provided a visiting area and visiting pod, and supported people to keep in touch with family and friends using technology.
“The provider had ensured that relatives could visit their loved ones in complete safety.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your COVID-19 infection prevention arrangements changed since this inspection?
- 02How do you now test new residents and manage their first days in the home?
- 03What arrangements are currently in place for indoor and outdoor visits?
- 04How do you make sure staff have access to protective equipment and follow the current infection control guidance?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 2021 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, August 2019
Rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found exceptionally caring and well-led support, with Good ratings for safety, effectiveness and responsiveness.
Inspectors visited without notice on 9 and 16 May 2019. They spoke with people living in the home, families, staff and health professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, accident and incident records, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring and Well-led were Outstanding. Safe, Effective and Responsive were Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training, good health support and activities that reflected people's interests.
Inspectors found a strong focus on treating people as individuals. Staff were described as exceptionally kind and compassionate. Families were especially positive about support at the end of life and the involvement of managers.
This was an improvement in Caring, which rose from Good to Outstanding. Responsive fell from Outstanding to Good because some printed care records did not show recent changes and some families felt minor concerns were not always acted on.
Kind and personalised care
Staff knew people well and adapted support to their histories, interests, communication and wishes. Inspectors saw staff taking time to reassure people without rushing them.
“People received exceptionally high quality care from staff who were passionate about delivering personalised care in a dignified and respectful way.” from the report
Strong leadership
Managers were visible and approachable. The provider and senior managers were closely involved and used feedback and audits to improve the home.
“The home was extremely well led by a management team who had a clear, positive and open culture” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough regular staff, with checks on recruitment, training and competence. Inspectors found the medicines records they checked were complete and up to date.
“There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to support people safely according to their needs.” from the report
Support at the end of life
Families were very positive about end-of-life care. The home offered practical support and information to help relatives honour people's wishes.
“Without exception family members were extremely positive regarding the care and support they and their relatives received at the end of their life.” from the report
Printed care records were not always current
needs fixingOne printed care plan did not show recent changes to the person's health needs. Staff knew the changes through verbal handovers, but inspectors asked the managers to review how records were updated.
“However, the records did not always reflect recent changes to people's care.” from the report
Some minor concerns were not always felt to be heard
minorSome relatives said concerns such as bathing or dental hygiene were not always taken on board. The home investigated these issues and gave information about action taken after the inspection.
“However, we did receive some mixed feedback regarding the home's responsiveness to minor concerns raised by family members.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure printed care plans are updated as soon as a person's health or care needs change?
- 02How are concerns about bathing recorded, investigated and followed up with families?
- 03How do you check that people's dental care and ability to eat safely are being managed?
- 04What activities and outings would be available for my relative, including if they do not want to join group activities?
- 05How would you support my relative and our family if end-of-life care became necessary?
This was an unannounced planned comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality and safety of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Woodlands
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Outstanding rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Outstandingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- November 2016OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
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.