• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Woodlands House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

118 Cavendish Road, London, SW19 2HJ (020) 8543 8651

Provided and run by:
Central and Cecil Housing Trust

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

3 May 2017

During a routine inspection

Woodlands House is a large care home which provides accommodation and personal care and/or nursing care for up to 64 older people. People using the service had a wide range of healthcare and medical needs, some of who are living with dementia. The home is able to accommodate up to 12 people who require intermediate care. Intermediate care is provided to people who need extra support for a short period of time to help them recover from illness or injury. The overall responsibility for the provision of intermediate care lies with another service provider. However staff at this service provide people with support with their personal care and nursing needs. At the time of this inspection there were 45 people using the service.

At the last Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection in March 2015 the service was rated ‘good’ overall. However in the key question ‘Is it well led? we rated the service ‘requires improvement’. This is because we found a breach in legal requirements. The provider was not submitting notifications about significant events that took place at the service in a timely manner. We carried out a focussed inspection in June 2015 and found at that time the provider was meeting the legal requirement. We were able to improve their rating for the key question, ‘Is it well led?’ to ‘good’ because we saw evidence of consistent good practice in relation to the submission of notifications.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘good’ overall. The service demonstrated they met the regulations and fundamental standards. However in the key question ‘Is it responsive?’ we rated the service ‘requires improvement’. This is because we found people may not be having all their social and physical needs met. People told us there was not enough to do to keep them active and engaged. Senior managers were already aware, prior to our inspection, that improvement was needed in the planning and organisation of activities and were taking steps to address this at the time of our inspection.

Although people said the provision of activities at the service needed to improve, they were generally satisfied with other aspects of the service. The provider maintained appropriate arrangements to deal with people’s complaints and concerns if they were dissatisfied with any aspect of the service.

People continued to be safe at Woodlands House. Staff knew how to protect people from the risk of abuse and followed appropriate guidance to minimise identified risks to people's health, safety and welfare.

Some people said at busy times the service appeared short staffed. However there were enough staff to keep people safe and the provider reviewed staffing levels monthly. The provider had arrangements in place to check the suitability and fitness of all staff. However senior staff were reviewing arrangements for carrying out criminal records checks on existing staff, after our inspection, to ensure they had full assurance about staff’s on-going suitability to work at the service.

People had a current support plan which reflected their choices and preferences for how their care and support needs should be met by staff. These were reviewed regularly by senior staff. Staff received relevant training and were well supported by senior staff to help them to meet people’s needs effectively.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs. They also received the support they needed to stay healthy and to access healthcare services when needed. Medicines were managed safely and people received them as prescribed.

Staff were kind and treated people with dignity and respect. They ensured people’s privacy was maintained particularly when being supported with their personal care needs. 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.

The environment was clean and clear of slip and trip hazards. The premises and equipment were regularly maintained and serviced to ensure these were safe.

Since our last inspection there had been a change in leadership at service and provider level. People and staff spoke positively about the new home manager and said they were open, approachable and supportive. Senior managers at provider level had oversight and scrutiny of the service and supported the home manager to ensure quality standards were met. Audits were used to identify areas of the service that needed to improve to ensure people experienced good quality safe care and support. The home manager took responsibility for ensuring these improvements were made.

Senior managers were working proactively with the service provider for intermediate care. Managers from both services acknowledged there had been challenges in ensuring people using this service received joined up, seamless care and support. However they were working together to address issues and improve standards so that people received the care and support they needed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

22 December 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a comprehensive inspection of Woodlands House on 19 March 2015. After that inspection we received information of concerns about the management of medicines at the service. As a result we undertook this unannounced focused inspection to look into those concerns. The inspection took place on 22 December 2015. This report only covers our findings in relation to those concerns. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Woodlands House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Woodlands House provides accommodation for up to 64 people who require personal care and/or nursing care. People using the service had a wide range of healthcare and nursing needs, some of whom are living with dementia. The home is able to accommodate up to 12 people who require intermediate care. Intermediate care is provided to people who need extra support for a short period of time to help them recover from illness or injury. There were 60 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At this inspection we found people received their medicines as prescribed and in a timely manner. We saw staff administered medicines in a safe, caring and effective manner. Our checks of records showed these were maintained accurately and indicated people received their medicines as prescribed.

People’s medicines were reviewed regularly by their GP. There was regular involvement and input from GP’s who visited the home every week to review and carry out checks of people's healthcare needs and medicines they were taking.

Appropriate guidance was available to staff on how and when to administer ‘as required’ medicines. ‘As required’ medicines are medicines which are only needed in specific situations such as when a person may be experiencing pain.

Medicines were stored appropriately in the home. These were disposed of appropriately and arrangements were in place for their collection by an external contractor.

The provider had taken appropriate action to put in place measures to reduce the risk of errors reoccurring following a serious error that occurred in November 2105. The registered manager told us there had been no further incidents or errors reported since that time.

The provider followed current and relevant professional guidance about the management and review of medicines. The results of internal and external audits were used by the provider to identify any action needed to improve the management of medicines.

26/06/2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 19 March 2015 and a breach of legal requirements was found. After the inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to submitting notifications about events and incidents in the home to the Care Quality Commission (CQC), in a timely manner.  

We undertook this focused inspection to check the provider had followed their plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Woodlands House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

We undertook this unannounced focused inspection of Woodlands House on 26 June 2015.  Woodlands House provides accommodation for up to 64 people who require personal care and/or nursing care. People using the service have a wide range of healthcare and medical needs, some of who are living with dementia. The home is able to accommodate up to 12 people who require intermediate care. Intermediate care is provided to people who need extra support for a short period of time to help them recover from illness or injury. At the time of our inspection there were 53 people using the service.   

The service now has a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.   

During this inspection we found the provider had taken appropriate action to ensure notifications they are legally required to submit to CQC were done so and in a timely manner.   

The registered manager had ensured all staff at Woodlands House were aware of the service’s’ legal obligations about notifying CQC of events and incidents and how and when this should be done.   

Information about the process for submitting notifications was displayed in the home and easily accessible to staff.   

The provider through quality assurance checks, ensured notifications were submitted to CQC in a timely manner when there had been an event or incident at the home.  Our own records showed the provider had fulfilled their legal obligations to submit notifications in a timely manner, following the last inspection.  

19/03/2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 19 March 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection of the service on 20 January 2014 we found the provider was meeting the regulations we checked.

Woodlands House provides accommodation for up to 64 people who require personal care and/or nursing care. People using the service had a wide range of healthcare and medical needs, some of who are living with dementia. The home is able to accommodate up to 12 people who require intermediate care. Intermediate care is provided to people who need extra support for a short period of time to help them recover from illness or injury. At the time of our inspection there were 60 people living at the home.

The service is required to have a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run. Although the home did not have a registered manager a new manager had been appointed in September 2014 and had made the appropriate registered manager application to CQC.

People said they were safe at Woodlands House. Staff had been trained to identify signs that could indicate people may be at risk of abuse or harm. They knew what action to take to ensure people at risk were protected. Other risks to people’s health, safety and welfare had been assessed by staff and there were appropriate plans in place to ensure these identified risks were minimised by staff to keep people safe from harm or injury in the home.

The home environment and the equipment within it, was checked, serviced and maintained regularly to ensure it was safe. The home was clean and free from malodours. Obstacles and clutter were removed to support people to move around the environment safely. There were enough staff to meet the needs of people. Appropriate checks had been undertaken on them before they commenced work, to ensure they were suitable to care for and support people using the service.

People received their medicines as prescribed and these were stored safely in the home.

People’s needs were met by staff who received appropriate training and support. The home manager had ensured staff had access to the training and support they needed to keep their skills and knowledge up to date. Staff were supported by senior staff and had opportunities to raise and discuss issues and concerns in the work place. They demonstrated a good understanding and awareness of the needs of people they cared for and how these should be met.

Staff encouraged people to stay healthy and well. People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to reduce the risk of malnutrition and dehydration. People’s general health was regularly monitored by staff and where there were any issues or concerns about this, staff ensured they received prompt support from the appropriate healthcare professionals. Relatives told us they were kept informed and updated about any changes to their family member’s health and wellbeing.

People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care needs and their views and preferences were listened to and respected. Care plans were in place which reflected people’s needs and their individual choices and preferences for how they received care. Before staff provided them with care and support people were asked for their consent to this.

The provider had procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff had received training to understand when an application should be made and how to submit one. This helped to ensure people were safeguarded as required by the legislation. DoLS provides a process to make sure that people are only deprived of their liberty in a safe and correct way, when it is in their best interests and there is no other way to look after them.

People were encouraged to take part in social activities and supported to maintain relationships that were important to them. The home was welcoming to relatives and visitors who were free to come and visit their family members when they liked. If people needed to make a complaint about the service there were arrangements in place for the provider to deal with and respond to this appropriately.

People and their relatives said staff looked after them in a way which was kind, caring and respectful. They told us staff ensured their privacy and dignity was maintained.

During this inspection we found the provider in breach of their legal requirement to submit notifications to CQC. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

People’s views were sought by the provider on how the service could be improved and designed to meet their needs. The provider took account of people’s views and used this to make changes and improvements that people wanted.

The home manager and provider were committed to improving the quality of care and service people experienced. They carried out regular checks of the service to ensure care was being provided to an acceptable standard. The home manager had access to resources and support from the provider to make the changes that were needed to improve the quality of care and experiences of people using the service.

20 January 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

At our last inspection, which we carried out on 14th May 2013, we had found that care plan records were not always accessible or adequately maintained. There were problems with access to the electronic records. Some care plans did not contain enough detailed information about people's medical needs to ensure care was always delivered safely.

The provider sent us an action plan to tell us how they would become compliant with this regulation. We found that at this inspection, records were accessible and most care plans were up to date, regularly reviewed and contained relevant medical information.

14 May 2013

During a routine inspection

At our last inspection in December 2012 we identified an area where the provider was not meeting the essential standards of quality and safety. The provider sent us an action plan to tell us how they would become compliant with the regulations. We carried out this inspection to review improvements.

People we spoke with told us they were consulted about their care. For those who could not take decisions for themselves appropriate support had been offered or their relatives consulted. Generally people spoke positively about the care they were given. One person said 'It's just like a hotel.' Another commented of the staff 'they are lovely, can't do enough for you.'

We spoke with three visitors and two professionals who visited the service that day. They thought the staff interacted well with the people and kept them informed about any changes. One visitor said 'they are so kind.' Appropriate safeguarding procedures had been followed when required and there were adequate arrangements for the management of medicines.

We found that the provider and staff had taken action to address the compliance action made at the last inspection on staff training. Staff told us that they had attended a number of training events. One person said, 'There has been a lot of training here. '

There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. We saw that complaints had been addressed, and feedback from people who used the service and their relatives obtained and improvements considered as a result. However care plan records were not always accessible or adequately maintained. This meant people could be at risk of unsafe or inappropriate care.

10 December 2012

During a routine inspection

There were 59 people either residing at Woodlands House or receiving intermediate care at the time of our visit. We spoke with sixteen people using the service and seven visiting relatives. We also spoke with eight members of staff, the registered manager and the deputy.

People said they felt well cared for and spoke positively about the care and support they received. Comments included, 'I am very happy with the care given here', 'The staff are very good, it is a nice home', 'They look after me well' and 'I am comfortable, the staff are kind.' Comments from visitors included, 'We are very comfortable with the decision to place my X here', 'The home has a good reputation locally" and 'The care is wonderful and I am quite happy with what they do for X.'

People knew who to talk to if they had any worries or concerns, and felt assured that staff would respond to these in an appropriate manner.

Individuals commented that they enjoyed the meals in the home and found the staff to be helpful and attentive. There was a stable staff team who have worked at Woodlands House for a number of years. Staff told us that they were happy working at the home and felt there was good teamwork. We found that the arrangements for staff training were in need of improvement however.

29 June 2011

During a routine inspection

There were 62 people either resident at Woodlands House or receiving intermediate care at the time of our visit. We spent time talking to people in all of the units and the feedback we received was generally very positive.

People told us that staff talk to them about the care and support they need, including with personal care. Visitors said they feel confident that staff know how to help and support their relative or friend. People also told us that staff respect their privacy and dignity.

Comments included,

'Staff listen',

'Staff are always available to help',

'Staff come when I ring the call bell'.

'Nothing seems too much trouble'.

We saw people have personalised their bedrooms with pictures, photographs and belongings.

People who use the service said they had not made any complaints. They said they would speak to the manager or staff if they had worries or concerns. Visitors said they had no worries or concerns. One relative told us that they had visited every day for three years and had no complaints.