Woodheyes

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Required improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We observed staff interacting with people politely and respectfully, including knocking on bedroom doors and waiting for permission before entering. This demonstrated respect for people’s privacy and personal space. People told us they were happy living at the home and spoke positively about the care they received. One person told us, “All staff are thoughtful and kind.” Throughout the inspection, staff interactions were warm, caring, and supportive.

Relatives spoke positively about the care their loved ones received and highlighted the kindness and patience demonstrated by staff during their interactions. Several relatives told us staff were “very patient” and took time to support people in a calm, respectful, and understanding manner.

Professionals told us they were treated with professionalism, kindness, and respect by both staff and managers during their visits to the service.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s care records clearly reflected their individual food preferences, including what they liked to eat and drink. Care plans guided staff to ensure these preferences were respected in daily practice. We also observed people being supported to make their own choices, including being offered alcohol, demonstrating respect for personal choice and lifestyle preferences.

A regular church service was held within the home, supporting people to practice their faith and meet their religious and spiritual needs. Relatives spoke positively about this provision. One relative told us the service was good and “The minister comes in,” once a month, which demonstrated people were supported to maintain their beliefs and routines that were important to them.

People were supported to exercise choice and control over their daily lives. A relative told us their loved one was able to go to bed when they wished, reflecting a flexible and person-centred approach to care. Another relative explained their family member preferred a female carer for personal care, and this preference was known to staff and respected. These examples showed the provider was responsive to individual wishes and promoted dignity, choice, and respect.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The provider had systems in place to support independence choice and control, but these were not consistently implemented. Opportunities for meaningful and personalised activities were not always fully developed. During the assessment, we observed people taking part in activities of their choosing, including playing board games in communal areas. We also saw people who preferred spending time in their rooms were supported to pursue individual interests. However, we observed 1 person had a wide range of books in their room. They told us, “I used to enjoy reading, but I don’t read anymore, and I don’t like to watch television or listen to music.” This highlighted the importance of exploring alternative, meaningful activities that reflect people’s current interests and preferences, rather than relying solely on past hobbies, to ensure individuals remain engaged and supported in ways that are meaningful to them.

People who were cared for in bed were allocated key workers, which supported continuity and helped ensure individual needs and preferences were understood. Some people were supported to access the local community, promoting independence and social inclusion. The provider acknowledged the need for more personalised activities, this as an area for further development, and advised they were working towards expanding community-based activities.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Relatives told us staff knew their loved ones well and had a good understanding of how to provide care and support in line with their individual needs and preferences. This familiarity helped staff respond adequately and confidently to people on a day-to-day basis.

We reviewed call bell records covering the previous 12 months, which showed calls for assistance were responded to within sufficient timescales. We observed staff were responsive and vigilant in their monitoring of people throughout the day. They were quick to recognise changes in people’s presentation, mood, or behaviour and responded promptly and effectively. Where potential signs of distress were identified, staff offered reassurance, redirection, or support calmly and sensitively to reduce anxiety and minimise risk. This proactive approach helped maintain people’s well-being and contributed to a safe and supportive environment.

The provider cared about and promoted the well-being of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff mostly gave positive feedback about working at the home, the management team, and the people they supported. Staff described a supportive and collaborative working environment and spoke about good team relationships. One staff member told us, “I enjoy it, I like looking after the residents,” while another said, “We all work well together.”

Staff told us they received regular supervision and felt able to raise concerns openly and in confidence. This included both work-related matters and personal concerns, demonstrating an open and supportive management culture. Staff felt listened to and valued, and they described opportunities to develop their skills. One staff member told us, “When I’m not confident in an area, my knowledge is checked, and this helps my learning.”

The registered manager showed a clear understanding of the importance of supporting staff wellbeing and ensuring staff felt valued and respected. They recognised the commitment of the staff team and acknowledged that several staff members had worked in the home for many years, which contributed to the consistency of care and strong relationships with people using the service.

Staff wellbeing was also supported through practical measures within the working environment. For example, bottled water was readily available to staff, which helped promote hydration and staff comfort during shifts.