Archived: Woodlands Care Home

Updated 2 January 2015

This report was written during the testing phase of our new approach to regulating adult social care services. After this testing phase, inspection of consent to care and treatment, restraint, and practice under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was moved from the key question ‘Is the service safe?’ to ‘Is the service effective?’

The ratings for this location were awarded in October 2014. They can be directly compared with any other service we have rated since then, including in relation to consent, restraint, and the MCA under the ‘Effective’ section. Our written findings in relation to these topics, however, can be read in the ‘Is the service safe’ sections of this report.

The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an expert by experience with experience of care homes for older people. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service and the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

Around the time we were carrying out this inspection, CQC received some information of concern that we have considered in this inspection.

During the inspection we carried out a tour of the premises, viewed a variety of records including four people’s care records, servicing and maintenance records for equipment and the premises, medicines administration record charts, three staff files, audit reports and a sample of policies and procedures. We observed the mealtime experience for people and interaction between people using the service and staff.

We spoke with eight people using the service, six visitors, the registered manager, four care staff, an activities coordinator, the cook, the cleaner, the administrator, the hairdresser and five healthcare professionals involved with the service.  

Updated 2 January 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which looks at the overall quality of the service.

This was an unannounced inspection. The last inspection took place on 20 March 2014 and the provider was compliant with the regulations we checked.

Woodlands Care Home provides personal care for up to 17 people with dementia care needs in single bedrooms. At the time of the inspection the home had no vacancies.

The registered manager has worked at the service for several years.  A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law, as does the provider.

People and their relatives were happy with the care provided and told us they felt safe and staff treated them with dignity and respect. We found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

We identified some shortfalls with medicines management, which could place people at risk of not receiving their medicines safely. This was a breach of the regulation in relation to medicines management. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Staff understood safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures and were clear about the process to follow to report concerns. Staff we spoke with and records we saw confirmed recruitment and training procedures were being followed. Staff demonstrated an understanding of people’s individual needs and wishes and knew how to meet them.

People using the service, relatives and staff said the manager was approachable and supportive. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service and people and relatives felt confident to express any concerns, so these could be addressed.