CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodlands Residential Home for Ladies
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risk assessments, safeguarding procedures, recruitment checks and medicines systems were in place, and the home was clean and hygienic.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and preferences were assessed, staff received relevant training, and people were supported with healthcare, food, drink and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with warmth, compassion, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well and supported their independence and involvement in care decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were personalised and activities reflected people's interests. People could choose whether to take part, maintain relationships and make complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found visible leadership, good oversight and effective audits. People, relatives and staff were asked for feedback, and the home used this to make improvements.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, safe medicines and strong management while building work was under way.
This was an unannounced planned inspection. One inspector observed care, spoke with six people, a relative, the manager and six staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records. Feedback was also received from relatives and professionals.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were treated with kindness and respect, received personalised support, and were encouraged to make choices and take part in activities.
The home was clean, medicines were managed safely, staff were suitably recruited and trained, and people could access healthcare when needed. Building work was taking place, but inspectors said it was being managed to reduce disruption. The last overall rating was Good, published in April 2013.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described warm, positive relationships with staff. Inspectors observed staff respecting privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion and their privacy and dignity respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records reflected people's needs, choices and interests. Staff knew people well and adapted their approach to each person.
“People's care records were detailed and person-centred, providing important information to guide staff on how to meet their individual needs.” from the report
Safe care arrangements
Inspectors found suitable safeguarding, risk management, recruitment and medicines systems. The home was also clean and hygienic.
“Effective systems and processes were in place to make sure people received their medicines as they had been prescribed with clear records kept.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to follow hobbies, join activities if they wished and keep in touch with family and friends.
“People were encouraged and enabled to pursue their hobbies, participate in activities of their choice through a full and varied activities programme.” from the report
Visible management
The manager and provider were regularly present, sought feedback and used audits and development plans to oversee the home.
“There was visible leadership in the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What building work is still planned, and how will you minimise disruption to residents?
- 02How will you keep me updated about the progress of the refurbishment?
- 03How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed with them and the family?
- 04What activities and support would be available if my relative preferred not to join group activities?
- 05How can I raise a concern, and how will you tell me what action has been taken?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the overall rating and each key question rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 December 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.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Woodlands Residential Home for Ladies was rated Good overall; inspectors found outstandingly caring support, with some records and monitoring still being improved.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 2 March 2017. They spoke with residents, a relative, staff, visitors and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home supported 20 women, against a maximum of 23. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines support, suitable training and good access to health care. Residents' food and drink needs were assessed and met.
Care was rated Outstanding. Inspectors saw staff who were exceptionally kind, patient and respectful. Residents were listened to, offered choices and supported to keep their independence, interests and relationships.
The overall rating was Good. The home had fixed two breaches found at the March 2016 inspection. However, personal emergency evacuation records, some care plan reviews, formal supervision records and auditing systems still needed further development.
Kind and respectful care
Staff gave residents time, listened carefully and treated them with warmth and respect. Inspectors saw care that was highly personal rather than routine.
“Staff were exceptionally compassionate, attentive and caring in their interactions with people.” from the report
Personal choices respected
Residents were supported to choose how they spent their day, what they ate and whether they joined activities. Staff also supported personal interests and independence.
“People told us that they felt that their choices, independence, privacy and dignity was promoted and respected and our observations confirmed this.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff, with a stable team and no agency staff used for cover. Medicines were given safely, with staff explaining changes and allowing residents enough time.
“People were prompted, encouraged and reassured as they took their medicines and given the time they needed.” from the report
Good health and nutrition support
The home monitored people's nutrition, offered choices and obtained professional advice when needed. Staff contacted health professionals appropriately and followed their guidance.
“People had access to health care services and received on-going support where required.” from the report
Improvements after the previous inspection
The provider had acted on the two breaches found in March 2016. Medicines monitoring, care records and statutory notifications had improved.
“At this inspection we found that the provider had acted on these concerns and made improvements to ensure that they were consistently delivering a high standard of care and support.” from the report
Emergency evacuation records
needs fixingThe home did not yet have personal emergency evacuation plans showing the specific help each resident would need to leave safely. The provider said these would be introduced as soon as possible.
“There were no personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) records in place to give guidance regarding the specific needs of individuals should evacuation be necessary.” from the report
Risk assessments
needs fixingRisk assessments covered some important areas, but records did not clearly show that every possible area of risk had been considered for each resident.
“Risk assessments were put into place when needed but it was not clear whether other areas of potential risk had been considered for each person.” from the report
Staff supervision records
minorStaff received support, but formal supervision was not often recorded. The management team planned to strengthen the records.
“Staff supervision was not often formally recorded but the management team explained that they were continually monitoring the staff team.” from the report
Auditing still developing
minorMonitoring systems had improved, but the home was still developing its audit tools. This meant it was not yet able to fully show how improvements were being maintained.
“Work continued to be in progress to develop an auditing tool which would allow the management team to be able to fully demonstrate how they were continually assessing and improving the service provision” from the report
- 01Have personal emergency evacuation plans now been completed for every resident, and when were they last reviewed?
- 02How do you now check that every resident's possible risks have been considered in their care records?
- 03How often is staff supervision carried out, and how is it recorded?
- 04Have all care plans been reviewed regularly and updated when residents' needs change?
- 05What checks are now used to confirm that medicines records and other quality audits are complete and accurate?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of the overall service, covering all five key questions and providing ratings for each. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 April 2017 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 Home for Ladies
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Woodlands Residential Home for Ladies →
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Woodlands Residential Home for Ladies →
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 February 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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.