Woodrow Retirement Home Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People’s care plans contained good information about how staff could support them.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. People were supported to access healthcare and community services. One person’s relative told us their relative had been referred to a local community group which supported people experiencing symptoms related to dementia, they said, “As a family we are always reassured.” Another person’s relative told us, “They make appointments for the doctor and take time to ensure everyone is happy.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Staff understood people’s individual communication needs and adjustments had been made where needed. One person’s relative told us, “He needed subtitles on a bigger TV so he could read them, and they swapped the TV to accommodate this, we are delighted he is there.”

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. There were no formal systems in place to seek feedback from people or their relatives. Complaints weren’t systematically recorded so the manager didn’t have good oversight of any concerns people had raised. However, people and their relatives all told us they felt comfortable raising concerns. One person’s relative said, “They have been helpful and act on my concerns – I do feel comfortable, [Manager] seems to be very open and someone I can raise anything with.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to attend hospital appointments and access healthcare services.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People were not always supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. People’s care plans did not contain information about their wishes for the future, and people’s families told us they had not been included in any discussions around end of life care. One person’s relative said, “There have been no discussions on end of life care.” The provider told us they were developing this area of care planning.