We carried out a review of the data available to us about Woodland Court Residential Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Woodland Court Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Woodland Court Residential Home is a residential care home providing personal care to 28 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 30 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. Accommodation is arranged over three floors with lift access to all floors.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People felt safe. Systems were in place to protect people from abuse. Staff we spoke to were aware of how to identify, prevent and report abuse. There were enough staff to keep people safe. There were plans in place for foreseeable emergencies.
People were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff we spoke with were enthusiastic about their jobs and showed care and understanding for the people they supported.
We were assured that infection prevention and control practices were in line with current guidance. Medicines were stored safely and securely, and procedures were in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Governance systems were effective in promoting a person-centred culture and to ensure people received high quality care. Staff felt very supported in their role and that management were very approachable.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was good (published 10 January 2020)
Why we inspected
We received concerns in relation to governance. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other key questions. We therefore did not inspect them. Ratings from previous comprehensive inspections for those key questions were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection.
The overall rating for the service has remained good on the findings of this inspection.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Woodland Court Residential Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
The Woodland Court Residential Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 30 people, some of whom may be living with dementia or have a physical disability. Accommodation is arranged over three floors with lift access to all floors. At the time of our inspection 28 people lived at the home.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were safe and supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Risks to people were mostly recorded in their care plans and staff demonstrated they had a good knowledge of people. Safe recruitment procedures were mostly followed, and people received their medicines safely.
The home had a consistent staff team who understood the needs of people well. We saw staff mostly upheld and promoted people's rights relating to equality and diversity and safe recruitment procedures were mostly followed. People and their relatives were positive about the quality of care and support people received. Staff identified what was important to people and endeavoured to provide meaningful experiences for people.
The service was well-led by a management team whose passion and drive to deliver a good service, leading by example, was evident. People and their relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. The registered manager carried out numerous audits to ensure the service was effective. However, we did find that audits had not always recorded when actions had been completed.
Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. We saw evidence of people's and their relative's involvement in care assessments. People and their relatives were very positive about the food. People were encouraged to maintain a healthy, balanced diet, based on their individual needs.
People experienced care that was personalised. The home provided a range of activities enabling people to live fulfilled lives with a strong focus on social inclusion. The registered manager was proactive in ensuring they had a visible presence within the home and operated an open-door policy ensuring that any low-level concerns were dealt with promptly preventing escalation.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 16 June 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service had a 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.
On the day of the inspection visit there was a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the service. We observed people had a good relationship with staff and staff interacted with people in a caring and respectful manner. People told us, “I’ve lived here for a while now and I couldn’t ask for more polite, patient and kind staff” and “I choose to stay here in my room but they (staff) are always popping in to make sure I’m OK.”
People and relatives told us they thought Woodland Court was a safe place to live and that staff were kind, friendly and treated people well. They told us that the registered manager was always available and approachable. Comments included, “I have every confidence in the manager. I feel I can speak with (the manager) at any time and they listen to what I say” and “When I leave here I know (Person) is safe and well cared for. It gives me piece of mind.”
People and visitors described the management of the service as open and approachable and generally thought people received a good service. Relatives told us, “We chose this home because it just felt so homely and welcoming” and “It ticks all the boxes for us.”
People told us they were happy with the care they received and believed it was a safe environment. There was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere and we observed people sitting in small groups chatting together and laughing and singing with staff. Some people were unable to tell us verbally about their experiences and we observed they were at ease with staff. Staff sat with people when they had the time and spoke with them in a kind and respectful way.
There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff on duty to meet people’s needs in a timely manner. Staff completed a thorough recruitment process to ensure they had the appropriate skills and knowledge for their role. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to recognise and report the signs of abuse. They were confident any concerns would be dealt with. The registered manager had taken action to ensure staff had access to contact information for the local authorities safeguarding team.
The registered manager used effective and systems to record and report on, accidents and incidents and take action when required. There was a medical emergency during the inspection and the registered manager and staff managed to situation in a calm and professional manner.
Staff were supported by a system of induction, training, supervision and appraisals. Staff received training relevant for their role and there were good opportunities for on-going training support and development. More specialised training specific to the needs of people using the service was being provided. For example, dementia care and clinical nutrition support.
The service had safe arrangements for the management, storage and administration of medicines. It was clear from the medicine records that people received their medicines as prescribed.
There were safe recruitment procedures to show staff were suitable and safe to work in a care environment, including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks. The recruitment process identified applicants had the appropriate skills and knowledge needed to provide care to meet people’s needs.
People received their medicines on time. Medicines administration records were accurate and consistently completed. Staff supported people to access to healthcare services such as occupational therapists, GPs, chiropodists and dieticians.
People were assessed in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) where relevant and the management team followed the legislation to help ensure people’s human rights were protected. Best interest meetings were held when people had been assessed as not having capacity to make specific decisions. These involved other professional and family members to help make sure people’s voices were heard. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People were able to take part in a range of activities of their choice. There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff on duty and staffing levels were adjusted to meet people’s changing needs and wishes. For example arrangements had been put in place to extend the numbers of night staff in order to meet the needs of people using the service. A family member told us, “I visit most days and am always made to feel welcome by staff. The manager is here more often than not. I am more than satisfied with the support (person) gets here”.
The environment supported people living with dementia. For example signage was throughout the service with pictorial images to indicate the rooms function. An activity board was pictorial to support people and the daily menu board showed pictures of the food available each day.
People and their families were given information about how to complain. There was evidence the registered manager listened and acted on people’s concerns by formally responding to issues raised. There was a management structure in the service which provided clear lines of responsibility and accountability.
There were effective quality assurance systems in place to make sure that any areas for improvement were identified and addressed. Management were visible in the service and regularly observed and talked with people to check if they were happy and safe living at Woodland Court. Overall satisfaction with the service was seen to be positive.
Equipment and supply services including electricity, fire systems and gas were being maintained.