CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodlands
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were given as prescribed, staffing was sufficient and recruitment checks were completed. Infection prevention arrangements were also found to be effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management roles, regular audits, good communication between shifts and a positive culture focused on people's independence and achievements.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Woodlands rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and strong leadership, with a review needed for medicines on recreational trips.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 23 October 2023. One inspector looked at Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control. They met all five people living in the home, spoke with staff and managers, received feedback from relatives and professionals, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and other records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Good for Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were managed, medicines were given as prescribed, staffing levels were sufficient, and people were protected from abuse. People were supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities and community life.
The home had a stable staff team and a supportive culture. Managers used audits, feedback and partnership working to monitor the service and make improvements. The report noted some areas to review, including how medicines are managed during recreational trips and deteriorating carpets.
This was not a full inspection of all five areas. The ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection in 2017 when calculating the overall Good rating.
Risks were managed
People's individual risks were assessed and reduced. Staff understood how to support people with anxiety or difficult situations, and restraint was not used.
“Risks in relation to people's care and support needs had been assessed and appropriately mitigated.” from the report
Medicines were well recorded
People received medicines as prescribed. Records were accurate, staff were trained, and some people were supported to take more responsibility for their own medicines.
“Medicine Administration Records (MARs) were accurately completed and in line with national guidance.” from the report
Enough staff
The home was fully staffed, with rotas planned around people's needs and community activities. Inspectors found safe recruitment checks were in place.
“The service was fully staffed, and rotas showed staffing levels were planned to ensure people's needs were met and community engagement supported.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make meaningful choices, change their minds and take part in activities they wanted. Staff understood and used people's communication preferences.
“People were empowered to make meaningful decisions and choices.” from the report
Supportive leadership
Managers were described as supportive and approachable. Audits, handovers and feedback systems were used to monitor the service and identify improvements.
“Audits were completed regularly to monitor performance, identify any issues and drive improvements in the service's performance.” from the report
Medicines on recreational trips
minorThe home had arrangements for medicines during education or work placements, but the manager planned to review processes and staff practice for recreational trips.
“The manager intended to review these processes and current staff practices to ensure people's medication needs were also met during recreational trips.” from the report
Deteriorating carpets
minorAudits found that carpets on the stairs and in some shared areas were starting to deteriorate. Funding had been sourced and quotes obtained, but the replacement work was not yet complete at the inspection.
“Prior to the inspection these audits had identified that carpets on the stairs and in some communal spaces were starting to deteriorate.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to make sure medicines are safely managed during recreational trips?
- 02When will the carpets on the stairs and in communal areas be replaced?
- 03What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the 2017 comprehensive inspection?
- 04How will you support my relative to manage their own medicines, if they want to?
- 05How will you keep relatives informed if there is a significant incident or change in my relative's wellbeing?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, with infection prevention and control also reviewed; the other ratings carried over from the 2017 comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 December 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, April 2021
Woodlands was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed safely.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 8 April 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than the full quality of care.
Inspectors were assured that staff used personal protective equipment properly. They also found the home was clean, supplies were available, visitors were screened, and social distancing arrangements were in place.
People could choose to stay in their rooms or use shared areas. Staff supported people to go out safely, keep in touch with others, and take part in extra activities during lockdown. The service was inspected but not rated.
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home was clean and had procedures to reduce infection control risks.
“The service was clean throughout, and there were procedures to ensure any infection control risks were minimised.” from the report
Support during lockdown
People were supported to keep relationships going through electronic devices and were offered more daily activities when usual activities were restricted.
“People were supported to maintain relationships and contact with others through electronic devices.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had a contingency plan, including arrangements for people who needed to isolate.
“The service had learnt from a previous outbreak to effectively manage any potential future outbreak.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, and how have they changed since the inspection?
- 02How would you support my relative if they needed to isolate during an outbreak?
- 03What are the current arrangements for visits, visitor screening and maintaining contact with family?
- 04How do you support people to take part in activities when their usual activities are not available?
- 05How do you arrange testing for people living in the home and for staff?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 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.
Every inspection of Woodlands
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.