CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Woodlands House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, clean premises and suitable infection control, although some staff lacked up-to-date falls prevention and pressure area care training.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management arrangements, regular checks on quality and safety, and an open approach to listening to people, relatives, staff and outside professionals.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care, but some staff training was not up to date.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 13 July 2021. Inspectors looked mainly at safety and how the home was managed. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. They found enough staff, safe medicines systems, clean premises and good infection control, including measures for COVID-19. Concerns about falls were investigated but were not supported by what inspectors found.
Some staff had not completed up-to-date training in falls prevention and pressure area care. Managers had a time-limited plan to address this within three months, and the CQC said it would monitor progress. The overall rating remained Good, as did the ratings for Safe and Well-led. Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so their earlier ratings were used.
Safe care
Staff understood the risks people faced and how to reduce them. Inspectors found that concerns about falls were unfounded during the inspection.
“People were protected against the risk of avoidable harm and abuse.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were organised and records checked by inspectors did not contain recording errors. Staff training and competency were monitored.
“Medicines systems were well-organised and people received their prescribed medicines as and when they should.” from the report
Clean and infection-aware
The home was clean and staff followed infection control guidance, including measures linked to COVID-19.
“We were assured the service was following current infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures, including those associated with COVID-19.” from the report
Staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. The home had few vacancies and low staff turnover, supporting continuity of care.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs and wishes.” from the report
Open management
The management team monitored quality, acted on issues and sought views from people, relatives, staff and outside professionals.
“The provider promoted an open and inclusive culture which sought the views of people living in the care home, their relatives and staff.” from the report
Training gaps
needs fixingAbout a fifth of staff had not completed up-to-date training in falls prevention and pressure area care. Managers had a plan to complete this within three months, but the CQC said it would monitor progress.
“Staff had not completed training in falls prevention or pressure area care.” from the report
- 01How many staff have now completed the falls prevention and pressure area care training?
- 02How do you assess and review my relative's risk of falling or developing pressure sores?
- 03What checks are made to ensure medicines are given and recorded correctly?
- 04How are relatives kept informed about changes in care, incidents or risks?
- 05What arrangements are currently in place for visiting and infection control?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 August 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection prevention and control arrangements during the coronavirus outbreak.
This was a targeted inspection on 8 February 2021. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control practices, including testing, protective equipment, cleaning, visiting and isolation arrangements.
Inspectors found the home was clean and well ventilated. Cleaning of high-risk touch points had increased, staff used protective equipment appropriately, and testing and isolation arrangements were in place.
People who were isolating were supported by consistent staff and one-to-one time. The home also helped people keep in touch with relatives through video calls, window visits and additional visitor testing at the end of life.
The service was inspected but not rated. The report gives an assurance about infection prevention and control at this inspection, rather than an overall quality rating.
Clean environment
The home was clean, with extra domestic shifts and hourly cleaning of high-risk touch points.
“The home was clean throughout. Cleaning schedules had been increased to ensure that specific areas identified as high risk of transmission of the virus, such as light switches and other touch points, were cleaned hourly.” from the report
Support during isolation
People who had to isolate were supported by a consistent staff team and received individual time and activities.
“People who use the service who were required to isolate were supported by a consistent staff team.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home supported contact with loved ones through video calls, window visits and additional testing for some visitors.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their loved ones through video calls, window visits and additional lateral flow testing for visitors of people who were being cared for at the end of their life.” from the report
Protective equipment and training
Inspectors saw staff using protective equipment in line with guidance. The home also provided enhanced infection control training and had infection control leads and champions.
“There was enough Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) available at the home and we observed care and domestic staff wearing it according to government guidance.” 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 on 8 February 2021?
- 02How do you support residents who need to isolate to have stimulating activities and regular one-to-one time?
- 03How can relatives visit or keep in contact with residents, including residents receiving end-of-life care?
- 04How do you make sure staff continue to use protective equipment correctly and follow testing and isolation arrangements?
- 05Which areas of care were covered by the home's most recent full inspection, since this inspection was targeted and not rated?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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 House
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: Good
- July 2015Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 April 2019.
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 Merton
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
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.