You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 20 July 2017

This inspection took place on 12 and 15 June 2017 and was unannounced. Woodside House is a nursing home that can accommodate up to 56 people. At the time of this inspection 55 people were living in the home, all of whom required nursing care. The home is on one level with 31 beds dedicated to support people living with dementia. This area of the home is called Memory Lane. The remainder of the home comprised of Willow Lane and Sycamore Lane. Some people living in these areas may also be living with dementia.

There was no registered manager in post. 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. The manager in post told us that they were applying to register with us. They had previously been the deputy manager in the home and we have referred to them as the manager throughout this report.

Our previous inspection in September 2016 had identified two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. These breaches related to safe care and treatment and the management arrangements of the home. This June 2017 inspection found that improvements had been made and consequently the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

The service was staffed in accordance with the provider’s staffing assessment tool. Feedback we received indicated that this may not have always been sufficient, particularly in relation to the amount of engagement staff were able to have with people. We have recommended that the provider review their staffing and staff deployment arrangements from the day to day perspective of people using the service.

Risks to people’s welfare were identified, planned for and mitigated as far as was possible. Suitable staff recruitment arrangements were in place. People received their medicines as prescribed for them. Staff understood their obligations to help keep people safe and to report any concerns that might arise so that suitable action could be taken.

Staff received suitable training and support to help ensure that people’s needs were met effectively. People enjoyed the food and where people required specialist diets or assistance to eat their meals, this was received. The provider needed to ensure that people always had drinks available to them. Some people had raised this as an issue with us. The service acted in accordance with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and staff knew about their responsibility to support people to make their own decisions as far as possible.

The staff were caring, warm and promoted people’s dignity. People and their relatives were consulted in relation to the care that was planned and their views were acted upon.

The service responded to people’s needs. People’s care plans were detailed and person-centred.

The service was well managed and robust arrangements were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provision.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 20 July 2017

The service was not consistently safe.

Whilst the service was staffed in accordance with the provider�s staffing assessment tool, people�s physical and social needs were not always met.

People received their medicines when they needed them and medicines management arrangements in place were safe.

Risks to people�s welfare were identified and acted upon to help keep people safe.



Updated 20 July 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received appropriate training and support to meet people�s needs.

The service was working within the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were offered choices about what to eat and drink.



Updated 20 July 2017

The service was caring.

Staff provided assistance and support to people in a warm and caring manner.

People, and their relatives where appropriate, were involved in making decisions about the care that they or their family members received.



Updated 20 July 2017

The service was responsive.

People care plans contained comprehensive information about how people�s needs were to be met.

People and their representatives were confident that if they needed to make a complaint it would be dealt with appropriately.



Updated 20 July 2017

The service was well led.

There were a range of audits and checks to monitor the quality of the service that people received.

People and their relatives were positive about the management of the home.