• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Woodlea Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

61 Bawtry Road, Bessacarr, Doncaster, South Yorkshire, DN4 7AD (01302) 535441

Provided and run by:
Leeland Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

21 & 23 January 2015

During a routine inspection

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 21 and 23 January 2015. We last inspected the service in August 2013 and found they were meeting the Regulations we looked at.

Woodlea is a care home which provides accommodation for up to 34 older people who require personal care. The service is located on Bawtry Road Bessacarr, a suburb of Doncaster.

The home had a registered manager who had been registered since 2014. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People we spoke with told us they felt safe living in the home and said staff were very good to them. We saw there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable on safeguarding and were able to explain the procedures to follow should an allegation of abuse be made.

Medicines were stored safely and procedures were in place to ensure medicines were administered safely. However, we found these were not always followed which could put people at risk.

The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were in place to protect people who may not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) sets out what must be done to make sure that the human rights of people who may lack mental capacity to make decisions are protected, including balancing autonomy and protection in relation to consent or refusal of care or treatment.

The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were only used when it was considered to be in the person’s best interest. This legislation is used to protect people who might not be able to make informed decisions on their own. The registered manager demonstrated a good awareness of their role in protecting people’s rights and recording decisions made in their best interest. They were also aware of the new requirements in relation to this legislation.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, sufficient numbers of suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work.

Suitable arrangements were in place and people were provided with a choice of healthy food and drink ensuring their nutritional needs were met. However, we found meal times could have been better organised ,meals were slow to be brought out from the kitchen and some people had finished their meal before others were served at the same table. This did not ensure it was an enjoyable experience for people who used the service.

People’s physical health was monitored as required. This included the monitoring of people’s health conditions and symptoms so appropriate referrals to health professionals could be made. People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. For example we saw from care records that we looked at that people been referred and had received intervention from a speech and language therapist (SALT). This meant people with swallowing difficulties received food and fluids appropriate to their needs. People told us their GP visited every week but if they required them between visits staff always responded to their wishes.

We saw interactions between staff and people living in the home were kind and respectful to people when they were supporting them. Staff were aware of the values of the service and knew how to respect people’s privacy and dignity.

Activities were provided. We saw people were involved in activities on the day of our visit. However, some people told us they would like more activities. The registered manager was addressing this.

The manager told us they had received one formal complaint in the last twelve months. We saw this was being dealt with appropriately. People we spoke with did not raise any complaints or concerns about living at the home. Relatives we spoke with told us they had no concerns but would discuss with the staff or manager if they needed to raise any issues.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw copies of reports produced by the Registered Manager and the company’s regional manager. The reports included any actions required and these were checked each month to determine progress.

During this inspection we identified a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. We found people did not always receive their medication as prescribed. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

15 August 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with people who used the service and their relatives. They spoke positively about the standard of care they received. They told us they had been asked for their consent prior to receiving care and treatment. We observed staff explained to people the type of care they were giving and the reason for it.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. People told us staff cared for them appropriately. One person told us, "Even if I won the European lottery I would not leave, I have everything I need here." Another person said, "The staff go out of their way to be helpful."

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. People we spoke with confirmed staff were meeting their care needs. We observed a lunch time period and found assistance was given to people where required. For example, we saw staff encouraging people to eat and drink in a way which respected their dignity and ability. People we spoke with also told us their call bells were answered promptly and they were not kept waiting for long.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. People we spoke with told us they had resident's meetings and could raise concerns with the manager or staff and these would be acted upon.

People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

26 April 2012

During a routine inspection

As part of our inspection we spoke with a number of people who use the service. They

spoke positively about the care and support they received. They told us they liked living in

the home and confirmed they were well supported to make choices and decisions about

their care. We received comments such as: "A very good place, all staff are good to us" and "Everyone gets good care, I am happy here, it's a good home. Very nice staff."

People living in the home, confirmed they felt safe and said they liked the staff. One

person told us: "Yes it's very safe and staff are very kind." Another person said, "Staff

always respect my wishes. They are all polite and help me alot"

During the inspection we spoke with three relatives who expressed their satisfaction with the standards of care at the home. They told us the staff were very good and they were kept informed of any changes. Some of the comments we received included: "Absolutely fabulous home, staff provide upmost care and treat people with dignity. Nothing is too much trouble. My dad loves being here" and "The staff are lovely, my father is very well looked after."