Wood Hill House

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We were unable to gain people or relatives feedback about the care they received. However, staff told us the service had improved and that people were well cared for. Partners also told us people appeared well cared for and were kept clean. We saw people being treated with kindness and compassion, by staff who respected their privacy and dignity.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We were unable to gain people and relatives feedback regarding being treated with kindness. However, we observed people being treated with kindness. People were relaxed in staff’s presence, and we received positive feedback from partners and staff about how people were treated. The management team completed a dignity in dining audit, and we saw people being treated with respect during meal times.

Staff had received training relating to proving person centred care to people. Staff told us people were treated with kindness and respect. Comments included, “We respect people’s wishes.” And “We know people’s likes and dislikes. When [Name] is upset, we know how to support them, we offer to do things they like, such as puzzles.”

Partners told us people appeared well cared for. One professional said, “[Name] always looks clean, I have no worries.” Another professional said, “[Name] always has their 1:1 staff when I visit, staff are not stretched. There is always a nurse too, the nurse is fantastic.”

We saw people being treated with kindness and dignity by staff. For example, one person did not like excessive noise, and we saw staff speaking quietly and respectfully with them. People looked clean and well kempt, we saw a person with their nails painted and their hair styled.

People and relatives were unable to provide us with any feedback regarding being treated as individuals. However, we saw people being treated as individuals, by staff who knew them well. For example, where people had a preference of female staff, we saw this was provided.

Staff knew people well and understood their responsibilities to treat people as individuals, in line with their preferences. Staff told us what different things people liked, such as food and what TV shows they liked. One staff said, “We support people on an individual basis, we always read the care plans before we support people.” Another staff said, “[Name] has been having trouble eating, I have made different options for them which might encourage them to eat more.”

We saw friendly interactions between people and staff. People were comfortable around staff, and we saw people laughing and joking with staff.

Whilst care records had improved since our last inspection, these could be improved to contain more person-centred detail. Such as people’s cultural needs and long-term aspirations.

People living in the upper floors could not freely move around the building or access the outside due to door lock systems in place. However, people currently living at the service were subject to DoLS authorisations and had 1:1 staff in place to assist them. Should the service receive new admissions in the future, this would require assessing to ensure people could move freely around the home.

Staff told us how they supported people to make choices. A staff said, “People always have 2 choices of meals or other options.” Another staff said, [Name] doesn’t like to go far away from the home as it makes them agitated, so we take them for short walks and sometimes to the shop if they want to.”

The provider had recently improved the garden areas, which now provided a clean space for people to sit, and included plants and gazebos. We saw staff offering people choices, including choices of meals and drinks. People chose when they would like to get up and when they would like personal care.

Managers conducted daily walk rounds, which included a well-being check on people, and if they had been offered choices.

All people living at the service had their own staff each day, meaning support could be provided at anytime they wished. One person told us what they liked to watch people dancing on YouTube and we saw them doing this on the day of inspection. They also told us they were going out to the shop to buy their choice of snacks.

Staff recorded people’s day to day care on a digital care planning system. Staff told us there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and daily handovers included sharing information about people’s needs. A staff member said, “We do verbal handovers every day, we discuss things like people’s food, fluids and any mood changes.”

We observed staff responding to people’s immediate needs, such as providing personal care and assisting people with their mobility.

Staff told us the morale within the team had improved and they felt supported by the management team. A staff member said, “Communication with the managers is good, they are very nice, and they respect us.” Another staff member said, “The managers are brilliant. They listen and act on things. They care about the staff and ask us how we are.”

Staff received supervisions and felt able to raise suggestions. Staff had recently undertaken training in various subjects to promote their professional development. Some staff had also undertaken ‘train the trainer’ training, which had allowed them to provide face to face training with the staff team. Such as positive behaviour support and moving and handling.