CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodpecker Lodge
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Incidents were not consistently reviewed for possible abuse, and risk assessments and care plans were not always updated after incidents or challenging behaviour. Staffing, recruitment checks, medicines management, premises checks and infection control were found to be satisfactory.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says no concerns were identified in this area and an earlier rating was used.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says no concerns were identified in this area and an earlier rating was used.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- Care plans were individualised, but records suggested staff did not always follow one person's care plan. The report also found that some incident records used language that was not respectful or person-centred.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Quality checks had not identified or corrected important shortfalls. Staff meetings, supervision and meetings for people using the service were not held regularly, and some staff lacked confidence in raising concerns.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Woodpecker Lodge was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks around safeguarding, incident reviews and management oversight.
This was a focused inspection on 15 and 19 November 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. Records about care, medicines, incidents, complaints, recruitment and safety were also checked.
The home was not always safe or responsive. Incidents involving people were not always properly reviewed, risk assessments and care plans were not always updated, and staff did not always follow care plans or record incidents respectfully. The provider also failed to tell the CQC about a potential safeguarding incident.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, and also Requires Improvement for Safe, Responsive and Well-led. This was a fall from Good at the last inspection. Effective and Caring were not inspected at this visit, so earlier ratings for those areas were carried forward.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff on duty to meet people's individual needs safely. People said staff responded without unreasonable delays.
“During our inspection visits, we saw there were enough staff on duty to safely meet people's individual needs.” from the report
Medicines and cleanliness
Medicines records and daily stock checks were accurate. Inspectors also found appropriate hygiene and infection-control arrangements.
“Staff maintained accurate and up-to-date medicines records and completed daily medicine stock checks to confirm people had received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Person-centred care plans
Care plans were tailored to individuals and included information about what mattered to them. People were involved in developing their care plans.
“People's care plans were individual to them and included information about what was important to them to promote a person-centred approach.” from the report
Incidents and safeguarding
seriousThe provider did not consistently review incidents to identify possible abuse or decide what preventative action was needed. A potential safeguarding incident involving two people was not reported to the CQC.
“The provider did not consistently review reports of incidents involving people who lived at the home to identify potential abuse.” from the report
Risk plans not reliable
seriousRisk assessments and care plans were not always updated after incidents. One person's records contained contradictory information about the risk of physical aggression.
“One person's risk assessments and care plans contained contradictory information about their known potential to become physically aggressive towards others.” from the report
Weak management checks
needs fixingQuality assurance systems had not found or corrected the shortfalls. Meetings for people and staff, and formal staff supervision, were not taking place regularly.
“The provider's quality assurance processes were not as effective as they needed to be.” from the report
Staff confidence
needs fixingStaff gave mixed views about management. Four staff members lacked confidence about raising concerns, including possible safeguarding issues, with the registered manager.
“Four members of staff expressed a lack of confidence about bringing concerns, including potential safeguarding issues, to the attention of the registered manager.” from the report
- 01How are you now reviewing all incidents, including ABCD charts, for possible abuse and preventative action?
- 02How have you corrected and updated people's risk assessments and care plans after incidents or challenging behaviour?
- 03How do you check that staff follow care plans and use respectful language when recording incidents?
- 04How often are staff meetings, formal supervision and meetings for people using the service now taking place?
- 05What action has been taken in response to the two CQC breaches, and what evidence can you show of improvement?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected, and earlier ratings for those areas were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 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 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care across all five areas.
This was a planned, comprehensive inspection on 5 March 2019. One inspector visited the home, spoke with six residents and seven staff, reviewed care and management records, and checked the building.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines management, personalised care plans and support with health, food, activities and daily choices.
Residents said they felt safe, respected and listened to. Inspectors found the home was clean and comfortable, staff were kind and patient, and managers checked the quality of care and acted on findings.
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff as kind and friendly. Inspectors saw staff spending time with people and treating them with patience, dignity and respect.
“People told us staff were kind and friendly and they enjoyed being with them.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to support people at home and in the community. Medicines were managed safely and staff received training and checks.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised care and choice
Care records gave detailed guidance about people's needs and routines. People were supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in work and leisure activities.
“The care files we saw were person centred and individualised.” from the report
Open management and quality checks
Managers were described as approachable and used meetings, surveys, audits and discussions to gather views and monitor care.
“The registered manager was committed to ensuring continuous improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and record my relative's individual needs before they move in?
- 02How will you support my relative's preferred activities, work, independence and daily routines?
- 03How do you check that staff have the training and skills needed for my relative's needs?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in care planning and reviews?
- 05How are medicines, risks and health appointments checked and recorded for each person?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; the inspection included six residents, seven staff, two care records, management records and a visual check of the building. 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 Woodpecker Lodge
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- December 2019Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 February 2012.
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
11 live-in carers within about an hour of Herefordshire, County of
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 £960 to £1,410 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.