Woodside

Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and support them to go out and take part in activities. Recruitment checks were also completed before new staff started.

“People were cared for by adequate numbers of staff to meet their needs.” from the report

Medicines were given by trained staff whose competence had been checked. Records were clear, and staff worked with professionals to reduce unnecessary medicines where possible.

“Clear medication administration records were kept. Staff signed when administered or refused.” from the report

Staff knew people well and supported their choices, interests, friendships and family contact. Inspectors saw respectful and friendly interactions.

“People were supported to take part in activities which interested them and maintain contact with friends and family.” from the report

The home had clear responsibilities, regular checks and action plans. Inspectors found that improvements from the previous inspection had been made.

“The provider had effective systems to monitor standards and plan improvements.” from the report

Some people had items locked away, but the reasons were not always clear. Inspectors also found no evidence that less restrictive options had been considered, although the manager said action would be taken.

“Some people had restrictions placed upon them. This included having some items locked away. The reasons for the restrictions were not always clear” from the report

Some relatives said they did not always feel listened to and were not invited to reviews about their loved one's care. This is worth discussing before choosing the home.

“However, other family members told us they did not always feel listened to and were not invited to reviews about their loved one's care.” from the report