CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodlands Residential Care
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, PPE, testing, social distancing, admissions and visiting arrangements. The provider also described measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
The home was not given an overall rating. The Safe question was inspected but not rated. The other four questions were not inspected in this visit.
Inspectors found good practice. Staff used protective equipment correctly, testing was in place and the home monitored vaccinations. Visitors could book visits and go straight to residents' rooms, with gardens also available when the weather allowed.
Infection control
Inspectors found that staff used PPE safely and that the home had appropriate supplies. Staff had also been trained in infection control.
“Stocks of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) were well-maintained and staff used and disposed of it correctly.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
The home monitored vaccination status and carried out regular testing for staff. Most staff and residents had received vaccinations and boosters.
“COVID-19 testing was undertaken twice weekly by all staff and lateral flow testing was required before each shift.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Residents could see visitors through pre-booked visits in their rooms, without mixing with others in the home. The gardens could also be used when the weather allowed.
“Residents were able to spend time seeing and speaking to their visitors in different ways.” from the report
Safe activities and movement
Inspectors saw residents taking part in activities and moving around the home safely while maintaining social distance.
“We observed people moving about the home freely and safely, maintaining social distance.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you managing staffing pressures now, and how might these affect my relative's care?
- 02How often are staff tested, and what happens if someone has a positive result?
- 03How can residents receive visitors now, and do visits still need to be booked?
- 04How do you manage staff or visiting professionals who have a vaccination exemption?
- 05How will you support my relative to take part in activities while keeping people safe from infection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 2022 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, May 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some medicines and record-keeping issues to improve.
The unannounced inspection took place over 13 and 15 March 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff, managers, healthcare professionals and the provider. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff recruitment and training records, and safety checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were protected from abuse, received suitable care from trained staff, and were supported with food, drinks and healthcare. Inspectors found that staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found stronger cleaning, kitchen management and quality monitoring systems. They recommended improvements to medicines recording, DoLS applications and the signing and dating of records.
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff knew people well and had formed positive relationships with them.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Safe care and staffing
Safeguarding arrangements, risk assessments, recruitment checks and staffing levels supported people's safety.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Legal requirements were met.” from the report
Good care outcomes
People's care plans reflected their needs and choices. Staff had the knowledge and skills to provide the planned care, and people received food, drinks and healthcare support.
“People's outcomes were consistently good, and people's feedback confirmed this.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The home had strengthened its cleaning, kitchen management and quality monitoring systems since the previous inspection.
“Improvements had been made since the last inspection so that more robust systems were in place for cleaning and management of the kitchen.” from the report
Approachable management
People and healthcare professionals described the managers as approachable and supportive. The home gathered people's views through surveys, conversations and care reviews.
“People and healthcare professionals described managers as approachable and supportive.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingThe coding on medicines administration records was not always consistent. The section for medicines given when needed was also being used for other information.
“However, the coding system used to record people's medicines on the MARs was not always consistent.” from the report
DoLS applications
needs fixingSome applications awaiting authorisation did not include all potential restrictions affecting a person. Staff took immediate action after inspectors raised this.
“not all DoLS applications awaiting authorisation had included all potential restrictions for a person.” from the report
Incomplete records
needs fixingSome fire safety, test evacuation and care planning records had not been signed or dated. Inspectors recommended that the provider review its recording systems.
“records relating to fire safety checks and test evacuations made around the service and in people's care planning documents had not always been signed or dated.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure medicines administration records use the correct and consistent coding?
- 02How do you check that the section for medicines given when needed is used only for that purpose?
- 03How do you make sure DoLS applications include every restriction that may apply to each person?
- 04What checks now confirm that fire safety, evacuation and care planning records are signed and dated?
- 05How will you continue the improvements made to cleaning, kitchen management and quality monitoring since the previous inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care and premises; inspectors reviewed three care records and a selection of medicines records. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 May 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 Residential Care
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 March 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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Liverpool
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 £1,260 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“All in all Kama b cared for the owner really well, every aspect of her care was of the highest standard.”
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.