The Woodlarks Centre

Updated 23 February 2024

Date of assessment: 5 March 2024 to 3 April 2024. This was a responsive assessment due to concerns raised around the management and culture of the service. There were sufficient numbers of staff members to meet people's needs. However, people were not always treated in a dignified way, with inappropriate restrictions being in place. Medicine management processes were not always safe, and quality governance systems were not effective in their use. We identified the provider had not obtained all the necessary pre-employment information in respect of staff to ensure they were of good character. Staff had close working relationships with healthcare professionals to ensure people's medical needs were met. Risks to people were managed to keep people safe. People were able to provide feedback on the running of the service, which was used to drive improvement. Relatives told us managers and staff communicated well with them, and that they had taken action to address any concerns they raised. Staff said they received good support from their managers and had access to advice when they needed it.

Updated 23 February 2024

People had access to support from staff when they needed it. Staff were kind and caring and understood people’s individual needs. People were supported by staff who understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding and knew how to report any concerns they had. People’s health was monitored effectively and they were supported to see healthcare professionals when necessary. When healthcare professionals issued guidance about people’s care, staff followed this to ensure people received their care in a safe way. People had opportunities to give their views on a day-to-day basis and via surveys, and these were listened to. If people made suggestions or requested changes, an action plan was developed to implement these. Managers were visible in the home and available when people wished to speak with them. Some people’s rights had been restricted inappropriately. When decisions made in people’s best interests, these did not always follow the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.