Woodside Residential Care Home

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 service management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. We found improvements at this inspection from our previous visit, although these improvements needed to be embedded further. The registered manager had recruited a strong team of staff, however there needed to be stronger processes in place to ensure that everyone took responsibility to monitor people’s care to ensure it was consistently good and safe. This was a continued breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

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.

Although there was a shared culture within the service where staff and leaders had a desire to improve the care people received, we found some systems and processes needed to improve. The registered manager said, “It’s taken a long time to get a good team together. Staff are brilliant at reporting now. We’re not here for us. It’s about the residents who live here. We have a culture of coaching, praise and ideas and we want staff to be proud to work here.” However, we identified a couple of issues which had not been identified by staff, such as the thickening agent and the error in one person’s weight.

We heard positive things about the registered manager and how they had improved the service since being in post. A relative told us, “I have had nothing but admiration and gratitude for the way the home is managed and run.” A second said, “The current manager is more personal, making positive changes.” A staff member said, “She's good at helping if we are struggling, she was a nurse so she's handy to have around. She's good for advice and help.”

Staff felt the registered manager was approachable, although we did receive mixed feedback. One staff member told us, “[Registered Manager] is always open, you can say anything, she cares.” However, we did also hear from some staff that although the registered manager was very supportive, they did not always feel confident speaking when they wished to discuss staff who were related to each other as they did not always feel listened to. The registered manager said, “We have staff meetings and supervision as well as residents and relatives meetings. The provider also carries out surveys. All of these give people a voice.”

The registered manager told us staff underwent training in equality and diversity and we confirmed this through the training records. This meant staff understood the need to give everyone the same rights and opportunities and to value and respect people's differences. Recruitment practices were inclusive. The provider recruited staff through a range of processes. This included recruitment via sponsorship. This meant prospective staff had the opportunity to work and live in the UK.

Governance arrangements had been strengthened but further work was needed to ensure these were sufficiently robust so people received consistently good care. The registered manager had recruited a deputy manager as well as other senior staff. However, despite this we identified incidents where people had been placed at potential risk which had not been picked up by senior staff, such as the storage of the thickening agent and the incorrect weight recording of 1 person. We had also identified someone who had not reached their daily fluid target on 4 consecutive days. Although the registered manager was able to demonstrate the person had more than their target on the days either side, there was no indication that staff had identified the 4 days when the person was below their target. Without a strong structure where each staff member took responsibility for people’s care and safety the risk was other issues may go unnoticed. People’s care plans contained relevant information on their needs, although we found records were not always contemporaneous. For example, people’s capacity assessments not identifying how they were involved in assessing their capacity. One person had diverticulosis, but there was nothing in their care plan in relation to how this might affect them. Another person’s care plan recorded their pressure relieving mattress should be set at 50kg but in another place it stated 37kg. Some of the language used in care plans was not appropriate, for example, ‘[person’s name] at present is not showing death is imminent’ and, ‘is to be a known escapee’. Contemporaneous notes are important. These help ensure people receive appropriate and safe care. Other areas of the governance systems were good and the provider also carried out audits on the service. However, overall governance arrangements needed to be more robust to help ensure that shortfalls, mistakes or poor practice were identified and rectified. This was a continued breach of Regulation 17.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership with external agencies. The registered manager said, “We work with two GP practices and have great contact with the nurses. One nurse comes in every week.”

Relatives spoke of positive improvements to the service. One said, “Changing the rooms over from the dining room and lounge has worked well.” A second told us, “Gradually improvements have been made and more improvements are planned. New chairs have been provided to everyone and her room has been repainted.” We spoke with the registered manager about the improvements they had made since our last visit. They told us, “The next phase is to embed and refine what we have in place. We need to look at the aesthetics of the building. It could be more dementia friendly. We would like to take more people out. We want different coloured floors and residents families have chosen the wall colours for the lounge and dining room.” The registered manager held an annual development plan which they used to record planned improvements.