CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woodview
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, recruitment, infection control, building safety and risk assessments were generally managed safely, although more detail was needed about reducing the fire risk from some prescribed creams.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's health, nutrition, communication and personal needs were supported well. Training compliance was 82%, some staff could not explain all the Mental Capacity Act principles, and some Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations were out of date.
- Caring?
- Good
- People received kind and compassionate care. Staff respected privacy, dignity and choices, although inspectors said some language used by staff was childlike at times.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people were supported with activities, communication, relationships and everyday living skills. Inspectors recommended better recording and handling of complaints, and suggested using more visual cues.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were visible, approachable and had effective checks on the service. Feedback was collected, but survey results were not always shared with relatives.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Woodview is rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with some improvements still needed in staffing, training and complaints recording.
Inspectors visited on 9 February 2023 and reviewed records, the building, medicines, infection control and daily care. They spoke with relatives, staff and managers, and continued checking information after the visit.
The home supports up to nine adults with learning disabilities and/or autism. All nine places were occupied. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported to make choices, access healthcare, enjoy activities and maintain relationships.
There were some areas to improve. Staffing was getting better but agency staff were still being used. Training completion was 82%. Some legal authorisations were out of date, and relatives' concerns were not always recorded or resolved quickly.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found consistently good care and management at the time of the inspection, but not perfection.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw calm, positive interactions. Staff understood people's needs and respected their privacy, dignity and choices.
“People received kind and compassionate care from staff who they responded well to.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records reflected people's likes, dislikes and support needs. People could personalise their rooms and take part in activities suited to their interests.
“Care records were person centred. They gave the reader a sense of what was important to the person, their likes and dislikes.” from the report
Support with health and nutrition
People were supported with balanced diets, special dietary needs, health checks and appointments with health professionals.
“People were supported and encouraged to eat and drink to maintain a balanced diet.” from the report
Open management
Managers were visible and approachable. Staff said they could raise concerns, and provider audits helped monitor safety and care quality.
“Governance processes were effective and helped to hold staff to account, keep people safe, protect people's rights and provide good quality care and support.” from the report
Staffing was still improving
minorRelatives and staff gave mixed views about staffing levels. The position was improving, but the provider was still working to reduce agency use.
“Comments from both relatives and staff about staffing levels were mixed.” from the report
Training completion
needs fixingStaff training compliance was 82% and managers had identified this as needing improvement. Not all staff could explain the Mental Capacity Act principles.
“Staff compliance was at 82% and this had been identified by the regional manager as requiring action to increase compliance.” from the report
Complaints and communication
needs fixingSome relatives said concerns took time to resolve. Inspectors recommended that complaints should be recorded and responded to more consistently so lessons could be shared.
“However, some relatives told us of concerns they had raised which took some time to resolve.” from the report
Out-of-date authorisations
needs fixingSome Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations were out of date. The manager was chasing the local authority and agreed to keep a clearer overview.
“People had DoLS in place as appropriate, although some were out of date.” from the report
Feedback was not always shared
minorRelatives were asked for their views, but the results of a family survey had not been shared with them.
“However, these results were not shared with them.” from the report
- 01What are the current staffing levels, and how often are agency staff now used?
- 02What action has been taken to raise training compliance above the 82% reported at inspection?
- 03How are complaints now recorded, investigated, resolved and used to improve the service?
- 04Are all Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations now current, and how are renewal dates tracked?
- 05How are relatives given feedback from surveys and involved in formal care reviews?
This was an inspection of all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control; the report describes it as the first inspection of the newly registered provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 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.
Every inspection of Woodview
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 February 2022.
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.