Woodlands Ridge Nursing Home

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 75 (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.

Throughout the inspection staff were friendly and welcoming. We saw caring and meaningful interactions between staff, people and the many visitors who came on both days. Staff were singing with people, laughing with people, and sitting quietly and chatting with other people. The atmosphere was relaxed and calm.

All the visitors and relatives we spoke with praised the staff team for their kindness. They referred to staff as “excellent”, “caring” and “kind and compassionate.” One person’s relative said, “When I visit there is never anyone without a smile and a friendly greeting. All staff are polite and helpful, including the maintenance guy.” They told us staff respected their loved one’s dignity. Staff had completed training and understood how to promote dignity and compassion. One staff member said, “Be very mindful of the person. During personal care we keep people covered and speak to them in a dignified way. It could be our mum or dad there; I don’t think you can go wrong if you feel like that. If you have that on your mind, then dignity is always there.”

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.

In particular, the registered manager knew people well and could tell us about people’s life histories, including their previous jobs. We saw this information was included in care plans and staff told us they had access to these and took the time to read them when people moved to the service. Some staff told us they would also speak with people’s families and friends to find out more about them.

People were supported to maintain relationships with friends and family. Visitors were made to feel welcome and on both days of our inspection, we saw many came to visit their loved ones. Some people needed staff support to keep in touch via telephone and we saw records that showed staff had supported this.

Activities took place during the two days on site; we saw some activities were tailored to people’s individual preferences, but not all. For example, we saw one person loved to sing, and staff encouraged this and sang with them but not everyone chose to take part. The care plans we looked at did include some information for staff on how people liked to spend their time, such as knitting, or listening to specific music or talking about certain things. We saw a member of staff spending one to one time with a person who was in bed. We heard them singing softly to the person. One person’s relative told us the handyman often popped their head around the door when they visited, to tell them about chats they had recently had with the person.

The registered manager said, “We are trying to build up links with the local community and get some entertainers in. We also want to get some local schools involved if we can.” The staff member responsible for activities was new in post and told us of plans they had for future meaningful engagement with people.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Care plans we looked at informed staff how much people could do for themselves and when they needed staff support. For example, when washing, some people could manage to wash their face and arms but needed staff to wash their legs and back. This meant people were encouraged to maintain as much independence as possible. One person’s relative said, “[Name] has deteriorated a bit, but when [they] were able to, staff did encourage [name] to do what [they] could.” Staff were observed encouraging people to be mobile and maintain their independence. One staff member said, “If some residents are capable to stand up then it’s good for them to be encouraged to walk. If we don’t encourage them then they’ll be sat in the chair all the time.”

At lunchtime, we saw that minimal support was provided to those people who were eating independently; instead, staff promoted people’s independence. We did see that staff were checking people were enjoying their meals, offering encouragement throughout the mealtime period and asking if people wanted more.

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.

Staff were visible throughout both days. We saw staff responding to people’s needs and reassuring them when requests were made. For example, when one person called out, “Help me”, we saw a staff member immediately respond. One person’s relative said, “When we [relative and person living at the service] need someone, there is always someone around. If ever you need someone, a member of staff will assist.”

Staff monitored people’s well-being and when necessary, they escalated concerns to the relevant health professional. Staff gave us examples of how they recognised when people were unwell or “not right.” This included how they recognised when people who were non-verbal might be in pain for example.

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

The registered manager said, “I am most proud of my staff team; they are so caring, some of them really do deserve a pat on the back. We do run an employee of the month scheme and staff get a gift. This is done based on staff feedback.”

Although there was no formal wellbeing service in place for staff, the registered manager told us, and we saw records that showed staff were provided with one-to-one support from the registered manager should they need it. All the staff we spoke with, said they felt supported by the registered manager and felt able to speak up if they needed more support. One staff member said, “The manager always encourages us and appreciates what we’re doing even if they’re small things. She gives us the space to talk at any time and she’s very friendly, so we have the confidence to talk to her always. I was employee of the month recently and she was praising how I handled [a particular situation].”