CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodseats and Norton
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, safeguarding systems, staffing, medicines and infection control were found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff were trained and supported, and the home worked with relatives and other professionals to provide appropriate care.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says ratings for questions not inspected were carried over from the last inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says ratings for questions not inspected were carried over from the last inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider had strong management and auditing systems. Leaders promoted person-centred care and worked with people, relatives, staff and external professionals.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Woodseats and Norton was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some minor record-keeping and training issues.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors looked at Safe, Effective and Well-led because concerns had been raised about safeguarding, staffing and a closed culture. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals, and checked care records, staff files, medicines records and management audits.
Inspectors found people were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff promoted independence, choice and community activities. People and relatives described care as safe and kind. Medicines, safeguarding, risk assessments, staffing and infection control were found to be managed well.
The home was also found to be effective and well-led. Inspectors noted some minor gaps in employment histories, mixed training completion for some newer staff, and occasions when management checks were not recorded on audit templates. These issues were being addressed and no breaches of regulation were identified. The overall rating remained Good.
Staff knew people well
Consistent staffing helped people receive personalised support from staff who understood their needs and preferences.
“The provider had maintained a consistency in staff who worked with people and this meant people were supported by staff who knew them well.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, express themselves and take part in activities and community life.
“People were encouraged and supported to express their choices and we observed people being supported to access the community and activities.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Inspectors found no gaps in medicines administration records. Storage, stock checks and guidance for as-required medicines were in place.
“We found no gaps in people's medication administration records (MAR) and appropriate checks were carried out to ensure people had the correct stock of medication.” from the report
Strong management oversight
The provider used audits, checks and data to identify trends and improve people's support and staff practice.
“The provider had robust auditing and quality assurance systems in place.” from the report
Minor employment record gaps
minorSome staff files had small gaps in employment histories. Managers said a new system had been introduced to check these gaps properly.
“We identified for some staff there were minor gaps in their employment histories.” from the report
Some checks were not recorded on templates
minorManagers carried out regular checks, but did not always record their findings on the expected audit template. Inspectors considered this an administrative oversight.
“Both registered managers carried out regular checks on all areas of the service; however, sometimes this wasn't recorded in a template to demonstrate their findings.” from the report
- 01How do you check that all staff have completed the training needed for the people living here?
- 02What system now checks and records gaps in new staff members' employment histories?
- 03How are management checks recorded now, and can families see how actions are followed up?
- 04How do you record the use of prescribed creams and make sure body maps are kept up to date?
- 05How will you support my relative's independence, preferred communication, activities and access to the community?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and ratings for uninspected questions carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 May 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, July 2019
Heathcotes (Sheffield): Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with no evidence people were harmed by the concerns that prompted the inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 9 July 2019. Inspectors visited both buildings, Norton and Woodseats. They spoke with people living there, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care records, medicine records, staff files and the buildings.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, secure medicines, clean premises and detailed risk assessments. Staff supported people with health care, food, activities, communication and everyday choices.
The inspection was partly prompted by concerns about risk management, restrictive interventions and management systems. Inspectors found no evidence during this visit that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. The home used some restrictive interventions as a last resort and in a person-centred way.
Detailed risk planning
Care records explained each person's risks and gave staff guidance on how to reduce them in the least restrictive way.
“People's care records contained comprehensive risk assessments detailing the specific risks posed to them and guidance for staff about how to manage and reduce those risks in the least restrictive ways.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw staff supporting people calmly and respectfully. People and staff appeared comfortable and relaxed together.
“All the staff we spoke with, including all the managers clearly knew people well. We saw people and staff were comfortable and relaxed with each other.” from the report
Choice and activities
People were supported to take part in activities that mattered to them. Their plans could be changed if they wanted to do something else.
“People confirmed they had a planner, one person told us, "Yes I have a planner, but you can change your mind if you want [to do something else]. You wouldn't get into trouble.” from the report
Effective oversight
The home had systems to check quality, act on problems and monitor the safety of its buildings and equipment.
“The service had effective quality assurance systems in place. We saw any issues identified were recorded and acted upon.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What restrictive interventions might be used for my relative, and how do you make sure they are only used as a last resort?
- 02How will my relative's activity planner reflect their own interests, and how easily can they change their plans?
- 03How will you support my relative to make decisions, and when would relatives or an advocate be involved in best-interest decisions?
- 04How do you check that medicines are given correctly, including medicines prescribed only when needed?
- 05How often will my relative's care plan be reviewed, and how will you tell us about changes in their needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of both Norton and Woodseats, covering all five CQC questions; it also included a review of restrictive intervention practices. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 July 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 Woodseats and Norton
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- January 2016Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 June 2014.
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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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 £1,270 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.