CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodlands Gate Rest Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were being followed, including the use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning, social distancing and outbreak management.
- 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.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Woodlands Gate Rest Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were safe and found several examples of good practice.
The inspection took place on 22 October 2020 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic, focused only on infection prevention and control in the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and possible outbreaks. People who tested positive for COVID-19 were isolated, with a specific staff team supporting them.
The home had moved from paper records to a digital system. Inspectors said this gave staff more time for activities. Families were kept in touch through newsletters, video calls and letters. The home also changed meal times and communal areas to support social distancing.
The overall service rating and the safe rating were both recorded as inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give the home a new quality rating.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home followed protective equipment guidance and had arrangements for isolating people who tested positive for COVID-19.
“Government guidelines for the use of personal protective equipment were followed.” from the report
Contact with families
The home used newsletters, video calls and letters to help people stay connected with their families.
“Regular newsletters were sent to families and video calls took place to connect people and their family members.” from the report
Activities and records
Moving to digital records gave staff more time to support activities such as music sessions, doll therapy and a garden fete.
“The home had changed from a paper records system to a digital one which gave staff more time to support activities such as a garden fete, doll therapy and music sessions.” from the report
Staff wellbeing
The manager changed working patterns and duties to support staff wellbeing and vulnerable staff members.
“The registered manager had amended working patterns to support staff wellbeing and had amended duties where necessary to support vulnerable members of staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control arrangements are in place now for visitors and social distancing?
- 02How would you manage a COVID-19 outbreak, and how would people who tested positive be supported?
- 03How are families kept in contact with residents if visits are restricted?
- 04How often are communal areas and frequently touched surfaces cleaned?
- 05What full CQC ratings or assessments cover care, staffing, medicines and management, which were not covered by this inspection?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the overall service and safe ratings were inspected but not rated, and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 November 2020 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, April 2019
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found medication recording and occasional staffing shortfalls meant safety Required Improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 13 March 2019. The inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, and reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and management checks.
People and relatives generally said they felt safe, happy and well cared for. Inspectors found kind and respectful care, good support with food and healthcare, personalised care plans, activities and approachable managers.
The main concerns were in the Safe area. One person had missed two doses of medicine, and records did not always show whether medicines had been given. People also said they sometimes waited longer for care when staffing was lower.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good, while Safe was rated Requires Improvement. No enforcement action was required.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff supporting people with dignity and patience. People were encouraged to make everyday choices and keep as much independence as possible.
“We observed staff supporting people with dignity and patience.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans contained detailed information about people's preferences, communication and support needs. Staff knew people well and adapted care when needs changed.
“Care plans were personalised and contained good detail about how people wanted to be supported.” from the report
Visible management
Managers were present and approachable. Audits and meetings led to actions such as correcting medicine recording errors and buying a newer nurse call system.
“The regional manager and the care manager were visible throughout the day and took time to speak to people, their relatives and the staff team.” from the report
Missed medicine doses
seriousOne person had missed two doses in the two days before the inspection. No harm had occurred, but records did not always show clearly whether medicines had been given.
“One person had missed two doses of medication in the two days leading up to the inspection.” from the report
Incomplete medicine records
seriousMedicine records did not always show whether people had received their medication. Audits had identified recording errors, but the report still found safety was not consistent.
“Medicines were well managed although records did not always show whether people had received their medication or not.” from the report
Occasional lower staffing
needs fixingRotas showed there were not four staff on duty at least twice a week. People said they felt safe but sometimes had to wait longer for care when only three staff were working.
“When this happened, people still felt safe but told us they had to wait longer for their care and support.” from the report
Best-interests records
minorThe home was working within the Mental Capacity Act principles, but records of best-interests discussions were not always kept.
“Records of best interests discussions were not always kept and the care manager assured us this would happen in the future.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every medicine dose is given as prescribed and recorded correctly?
- 02What action was taken after the missed medicine doses found in this inspection?
- 03How many staff are normally on each day and night shift, and what happens when someone is absent?
- 04How are best-interests decisions recorded and checked for people who cannot make particular decisions themselves?
- 05What improvements have been made since this inspection to address the Requires Improvement rating for Safe?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that assessed all five areas, and it looked at both the care provided and the care home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 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 Gate Rest Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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 Dudley
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 £1,230 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.