Woodboro Residential Care 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.

This is the first inspection for this service under the current provider.

This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.
 

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

The provider did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and support choices. Whilst people were supported by staff who understood their personalised needs and preferences, we received mixed feedback about how well people’s relatives were involved in reviewing and updating care plans to ensure they continued to meet people’s changing needs.

People’s care plans evidenced a varying level of detail and personalisation, with some reflecting people’s individual preferences for support in more detail than others. People’s daily care records did not always reflect how people had been offered meaningful, personalised activities and engagement.

We received mixed feedback about how well people were supported to choose activities which met their personalised preferences. Comments included, “We do see a lot of people just sitting there, it’s very quiet” and “They put the telly on in the lounge. One news channel all day”. However, we also received feedback to suggest improvements were being made. One relative told us, “They have expanded their offering of activities”. Another relative said, “[Person] loved the singers. They join in, [person] is very musical.”

People’s relatives told us there was a lack of flexibility in when they could visit the service. However, the provider stated this was a decision that had been made in collaboration with people living in the service and reflected their choice to have protected and uninterrupted mealtimes. The provider told us this was regularly reviewed and there was a separate dining area which could be used for visits if people and relatives wanted mealtimes together.
 

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined up and supported choice and continuity. The provider responded flexibly, working in partnership with other healthcare services to adapt to people’s individual health needs. One health professional told us, “Communication with external healthcare professionals has been timely and effective, and staff have demonstrated a good understanding of residents’ individual needs.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to people’s individual needs. People’s care plans detailed how they communicated and any aids used to support their communication. During the inspection we observed staff offering choices and providing information in ways which met people’s individual needs and preferences.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care and support. People were listened to respectfully and Staff involved people in decisions about their care.

People’s relatives told us they were not always given feedback questionnaires or surveys to complete. However, they said staff and managers were approachable and available if they wanted to raise any queries or concerns. Comments included, “I have no complaints or concerns. I wouldn’t have any qualms about doing so [making a complaint] if I needed to”, “[registered manager] always has time to talk to you. They are in their office, and I can drop in if I need to” and “[registered manager] talks to me and listens.”
 

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to attend their health appointments or receive health professionals into the service as and when needed. One health professional told us, “Staff are cooperative during clinical visits and are willing to follow advice and recommendations appropriately.”

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 had completed specialised training to support them in promoting equality and better understanding people’s protected characteristics.

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. The provider considered people’s future planning including any end of life care wishes as part of their initial assessment of people’s needs and reviewed this information regularly.