• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Woodleigh Healthcare (Surrey Branch)

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Waterside Chambers, Bridge Barn Lane, Woking, GU21 6NL (01483) 767656

Provided and run by:
Woodleigh Healthcare Limited

All Inspections

13 January 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

About the service

Woodleigh Healthcare (Surrey Branch) is a homecare agency and supported living service provider providing care to people in their own homes. The service is registered to provide care to older people, children, people living with sensory impairments, mental health needs, dementia, physical disabilities and learning disabilities and/or autistic people.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

There were 22 people receiving personal care in their houses and flats, and there were 4 people receiving personal care across three supported living services the provider was operating. The service was also operating several other supported living services where people did not receive personal care. As a result, we did not inspect those services.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Right Support:

People’s were safely supported around their individual risks and staff understood how to maintain and encourage people’s independence. There were sufficient staff to cover agreed one-to-one and shared support hours, and people receiving homecare told us staff were generally on time. We were assured that the service were following good infection prevention and control procedures to keep people safe. Care records showed that staff worked with healthcare professionals to achieve positive outcomes for people.

Right Care:

People and their relatives told us they felt supported by staff in a kind, caring and dignified way. People’s differences were respected by staff and they had undertaken relevant training to effectively support people. This included training for learning disabilities and autism awareness. People told us the care was generally consistent and staff knew them well. People’s right to privacy was respected and staff encouraged people to provide feedback about their care.

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.

Right Culture:

The provider’s monitoring systems were not always effective in identifying and acting on shortfalls we found during this inspection. For example, we identified areas of improvement in relation to medicines documentation and storage some of which had not been identified by governance systems the provider had in place. Opportunities for improvement could be missed because monitoring systems in place did not consistently act on staff feedback. The provider supplied us with evidence on how they had addressed these shortfalls. We have reported on this in the well-led section of this report.

The culture of the service was open and inclusive. The three supported living services we visited were situated in residential areas and there were no outward signs to differentiate them from other houses in the street. People and their relatives were complimentary about the service and felt their ideas and concerns would be listened to by the registered manager and the provider. People told us they felt they could approach the management of the service with ideas and suggestions they had. Staff were generally complimentary about management and told us they were able to raise concerns if they needed to.

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 the service was good (published 5 October 2021).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about staff management of risks in relation to people’s care and the culture in the service. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

We did not find evidence of the concerns we received prior to the inspection in relation to risk management and the culture in the service but we identified areas of improvement in relation to the monitoring systems that the provider had in place. Please see the well-led section of this report.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Woodleigh Healthcare (Surrey Branch) 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.

8 September 2021

During a routine inspection

About the service

Woodleigh Healthcare is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. The service provides care to children and older people with physical and learning difficulties, frailty and dementia. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of inspection the service was providing personal care support to 43 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs and supported them in a way which made them feel safe. Infection control measures were in place to keep people safe and prevent the spread of Covid-19 and other infections. Medicines were managed well.

The service assessed people’s needs in a holistic way, which included likes and dislikes, preferences and their background so that they could support people in a person-centred way. Prompt referrals were made to other health professionals when required for their advice and expertise.

People told us staff were kind and caring in nature, and those that had live-in care and support told us that staff felt like a part of their family. People were involved in planning their care and had regular opportunities to review their arrangements.

The provider was proactive in seeking feedback from people and staff and used this feedback to improve the service. People felt able to raise concerns with the office, and staff told us there was an open-door policy and they would not hesitate to report concerns or make suggestions for change.

The provider had a positive culture with an approachable management team. The registered manager and senior staff supported staff at their calls to provide expertise and mentoring. The registered manager had good oversight of the service and audits had been carried out regularly to check the quality of care.

People had been 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.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 16 March 2020 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the date of registration.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our reinspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.