Woodview Care Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. Previous breaches relating to governance have been met since the last inspection.

This service scored 61 (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 had a vision statement and set of values in place. However, staff were not aware of them and they were not being used to guide day to day practice or provide a shared direction to support consistent care. Despite this, staff we spoke with were dedicated to providing good care and told us they focused on meeting people’s needs and ensuring they were safe and comfortable.”

Staff were positive about the registered manager and described them as approachable and supportive. Leaders were visible within the service and promoted an open and inclusive culture. Staff told us they felt listened to and that their views were taken seriously. One staff member said, “On a scale of 10 I’d give a 9. One thing I like about management is their listening skills, they listen to our opinions. We have a suggestion box which I use as there are things that I observe and I see changes on the back of these.”

The registered manager demonstrated integrity and openness and encouraged staff to share ideas for improvement. Staff told us they felt confident raising concerns and that managers acted on feedback. The registered manager understood their responsibilities and was committed to continuous improvement, including supporting staff development and maintaining high standards of care.

Staff told us there was a positive culture where they felt able to raise concerns without fear of detriment. The management team promoted openness and transparency and encouraged staff to speak up and share ideas for improvement. Staff were aware of the whistleblowing and freedom to speak up policies and knew how to escalate concerns internally and to external bodies if needed.

Staff spoke positively about improvements in the organisation and the support they received from the management team. One staff member told us they had been previously dissatisfied with work but now enjoyed it.

The management team promoted an inclusive and fair culture and valued diversity within the workforce. Staff told us they felt treated fairly and supported to develop their skills. A staff member told us, “Support is there from leaders, [I] can go to them with anything in the job or out. [In] some areas, I've requested practical training as [I’m] more of a practical learner which has been arranged.”

Policies were in place to promote equality and diversity, and leaders took steps to ensure reasonable adjustments were made where needed. Staff said they felt empowered to raise concerns and share ideas, and that their voices were listened to.

Governance systems had recently been implemented and were starting to have a positive impact, such as a reduction in falls. The registered manager had clear responsibilities and accountability, and staff understood their roles and legal requirements.

Audits and monitoring systems were in place to identify risks and inform improvement plans. However, improvements were still needed in some areas, including infection prevention and control (IPC) and care planning, which we identified in other parts of the inspection. Quality assurance processes were developing, and the registered manager told us they were continuing to strengthen these systems to ensure improvements were sustained and extended across all areas of the service.

The registered manager acted on information about risk and shared this appropriately. Staff told us they felt the service was becoming more organised and that changes were being made.

This service did not have any established community links in place. The registered manager told us they were planning to develop links with local networks to improve collaboration and support the service to become embedded within the community. They acknowledged this as an area for improvement and said they were committed to creating opportunities for shared learning and partnership working. However, no action had been taken to progress this at the time of the inspection.

Staff and leaders understood the importance of working in partnership with people, relatives and external organisations to ensure care was joined up. We saw evidence of referrals to health professionals and communication with other services to support people’s needs. Staff said they felt confident about when and how to involve other professionals and could give examples of collaborative working to support people’s outcomes. The registered manager told us they had worked closely with commissioners to support the improvements needed at the service.
 

The registered manager promoted a culture of learning and was beginning to introduce new governance systems to support continuous improvement. However, these systems were not yet fully embedded, and further development was required for them to be effective in driving sustained improvement. Although there were early signs of positive impact, such as clearer incident reviews and some emerging improvements in practice, these were not consistent across all areas.

Staff told us they received learning from incidents through handovers and team discussions, which helped them understand what had happened and how to prevent similar occurrences. Safety incidents were investigated and reported appropriately. However, learning was not always embedded into day‑to‑day practice, as we continued to identify issues that required improvement throughout this assessment, including infection prevention and control, medicines monitoring and care planning.