You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 25 March 2016

This inspection took place on 9 and 10 February 2016 and was unannounced. At the last inspection completed 9 April 2014 the service was meeting all legal requirements inspected.

Woodlands Quaker is a residential home that provides personal care and accommodation for up to 44 older people. The service accommodates up to 35 people in the ‘Main House’ and up to 9 people in a self contained unit called ‘The Spinney’. The Spinney accommodates people with higher levels of dependency, most of whom are living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 44 people living at the service and a registered manager was 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.

People told us that they felt safe living at the service and we found they were protected by staff who could recognise any potential signs of abuse. Risks to people were reduced through the use of risk assessments and effective reporting of accidents and incidents. People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff were recruited safely and background checks were completed for all staff members and volunteers. People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to keep them safe.

People were supported by a staff team who had received the training and support they needed to carry out their roles effectively. People were supported to understand and consent to the care they received. Where they lacked the capacity to provide consent or make decisions about their care, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were followed. People enjoyed the food and drink they received and their nutritional needs were met. People’s day to day health needs were met and they were supported to access healthcare professionals where needed.

People were supported by a kind and caring staff team who knew them and supported their individual preferences. People were encouraged to make choices about their day to day care. We saw that people’s privacy and dignity were protected by staff and their independence was promoted. People were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.

People and their relatives were involved in the development and review of their care plans. They received the care and support they needed. People had access to leisure opportunities and plans were in place to further develop the range of activities that people could access. People told us that they were able to raise complaints if they needed to. We saw that complaints were responded to appropriately.

People and staff were involved in the development of the service. The registered manager proactively sought people’s views in order to identify areas for improvement. The service was well-led by management and managers made themselves visible and available to people. Quality assurance systems were in place in order to identify and action areas for improvement within the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 25 March 2016

The service was safe.

People felt safe living at the service and were protected by staff who knew how to identify and report potential abuse. Risks to people were identified and steps taken to minimise these risks. People were supported by a staff team who had been through a thorough recruitment process. People received their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 25 March 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported by a staff team who had received the training and support they needed to be effective in their role. People were supported to consent to the care they received. People were happy with the food and drink they received and their nutritional needs were met. People had access to healthcare professionals when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 25 March 2016

The service was caring.

People were supported by a kind and caring staff team who knew them well. People were encouraged to make choices about their day to day care and activities. The privacy and dignity of people was protected and their independence promoted.

Responsive

Good

Updated 25 March 2016

The service was responsive.

People received the care and support they needed. Relatives were involved in people’s care where appropriate and people’s needs were reviewed regularly. People had access to a range of leisure opportunities. Complaints were listened to and responded to appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 25 March 2016

The service was well-led.

People were involved in the development of the service and their views were proactively sought. People were cared for by a staff team who felt supported by the management team. Quality assurance systems were in place to identify and make improvements to the quality of service people received where required.