Woodlands Ridge Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices.

Some of the care plans we looked at needed more detailed information or the information within was contradictory, such as different sections of one person’s care plan giving different information about whether bed rails were in use or not. In some other plans we looked at the information for staff on how to support people when they were experiencing anxiety or distress was not always detailed enough.

When people developed wounds, there were wound plans in place. However, these had been inconsistently completed by staff. For example, wound dimensions had not always been recorded and photographs of wounds had been taken at different angles, which meant it would be difficult for staff to easily assess if wounds had deteriorated or improved. We fed this back to the management team who were aware that some further work was needed on some of the care plans because care plan audits had also highlighted this as an area for improvement. There was a new deputy manager who had recently joined the service who told us they were going to be responsible for overseeing care plans going forward.

Despite this, we saw that staff did have access to information about people’s care and support needs. Additionally, staff we spoke with knew people and their choices and preferences for how they wanted staff to support them, and told us if they were unsure, they would check the care plan, speak with a colleague or ask the person and their family. One person’s relative said, “I do think staff know my relative as an individual person.”

Communication was shared amongst staff, including during handovers at the start of each shift. This ensured changes to people’s needs were acted upon. One staff member said, “We have daily meetings so things like that will come up or we would discuss it at handover at the start of the shift. If you’ve been off for a few days, the nurse will do a swap around so that the person who has been off is in handover and hears everything.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

There was a consistent staff team in post. People’s relatives commented on this and told us they enjoyed getting to know staff and felt it was a positive to see the same staff team when they visited

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. People’s relatives told us staff had made referrals to health and social care professionals when required. Staff told us how they referred people for GP review. Staff could contact the GP surgery at any time if they had any concerns or questions, alongside weekly on-site visits. We saw records of when people were reviewed by health professionals.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s communication needs were assessed and when people experienced difficulties with sight, hearing or speech for example, the care plans we looked at were informative and clear. Plans informed staff of any technology people used to keep in touch with friends and family. One staff member said, “One of our residents has a hearing problem, so I sit with [them], and I use my hands and explain would you like a cup of tea, and I show [them] the cup. We have pictures we can use as well.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Although the service planned resident and relative meetings, the registered manager told us attendance was poor. However, even when people did not attend the meetings, minutes were provided and sent to people’s relatives to ensure they were kept up to date. Overall, people’s relatives told us they felt they had no reason to attend meetings, because the service kept them updated either by phone, email or face to face when they visited. For example, one person’s relative said, “I’m not interested in attending meetings. The staff ring me up if anything happens, and if I raise anything it’s acted on.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People with protected characteristics were supported to have equitable access to services. For example, people with a disability which impacted their ability to leave the home were supported to access health services to meet their individual needs.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff received training in equity, diversity and human rights to help them understand equality and address discrimination.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Advanced care plans were in place, which included information such as whether people wished to go to hospital if their health deteriorated or if they preferred to remain at the service. Staff were trained in end-of-life care and could access additional support and advice from the local hospice if needed. Staff told us they felt proud to care for people at the end of their life and that because the service was small, staff were able to find the time to sit with people who might not have anyone to be with them. One health professional told us, “I am made to feel welcome at my visits, and staff value hospice input which makes for a better experience for patients and their families., I am very reassured by how quickly staff refer to our team. They seem to act in the best interests of end-of-life patients by contacting the hospice for any queries and advice regarding symptoms.”