Woodlands 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 service met people’s needs. The last rating for this key question was outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People using the service and their relatives told us they received person-centred care. One person explained, “They help me, and I have a good time. I am lucky really.” Another person told us, “I am satisfied with what is going on." Comments from relatives included, “They treat people like a family” and “The carers help [person] get involved.”

The provider employed staff who organised and facilitated a range of social activities.

The provider supported people to access community services. They also managed a day centre which people attended when they wanted. The staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments at home and in the community. Staff supported people to access some activities in the community including social events, religious services and dementia friendly cafes and cinemas.

The provider shared information with people’s relatives. They created a newsletter and shared information about people’s individual needs. Relatives explained they felt well informed. Their comments included, “They keep me posted on everything” and “They are in touch to reinforce information.”

The provider had systems for listening and involving people. They held regular meetings for people using the service and relatives. They had a suitable complaints procedure. Relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint and felt these would be addressed. Comments from relatives included, “We have 3 monthly meetings” and “We do relative and resident questionnaires.”

The provider needed to make some improvements to ensure people could access services and information. One relative explained that they, and people living at the service, did not always know which staff were on duty and had suggested a notice board with information to help people identify staff. The provider needed to improve and update signage to help people orientate themselves within the home. Some of the décor was not in line with best practice for environments for people living with dementia. Further modifications were needed to help improve this. The registered manager told us they had plans to improve the environment to provide free access to all inside and outside communal areas. They were not at this stage due to ongoing building works at the time of our assessment.

Staff supported people to access healthcare appointments and helped advocate on people’s behalf when needed. For example, when speaking with an external healthcare professional.

People’s human rights were not always respected. The provider had made decisions that were not always in people's best interests and did not always respect their privacy or dignity.

The provider had policies on equality and diversity. The staff had training about this.

The provider had not always anticipated and planned for the needs of people at the end of their lives. Some people’s care needs had progressed which meant their needs could not be safely managed without nursing care. Despite this, the provider had supported some people to plan for care at the end of their lives when this was needed. They had worked with families and external professionals to help make sure people were comfortable and pain free.