Working at Woodlands
33-35, London, N13 4AB
Operated by Woodlands Residential Care Home Limited
20 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
5.9/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 9 February 2026
Score: 5.9/10
Key Finding
"Staff feel well supported by the manager with sufficient staffing and a positive atmosphere, but a past neglect incident in delaying emergency help is a major concern."
Safety & Risk
4/10
!
The local authority had investigated an incident where the home failed to seek emergency assistance for person and concluded that this was an act of neglect and may have possibly had a negative impact on the person.
Staff Culture
6/10
✓
Staff told us there was a positive homely atmosphere in the home. Staff said they were happy with the level of supervision and support from the manager.
Staffing Levels
6/10
✓
Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs. Our observations showed staff interacted very well with people and had enough time to spend meaningful time with them. Staff also felt they had enough time for their duties without having to rush.
Training & Dev
6/10
✓
Staff completed an induction training programme and were up to date with mandatory training for their role. Staff had regular supervision. Staff said they were happy with the training they received.
Management
7/10
✓
Staff confirmed that the manager had made improvements and supported them well. One staff member told us, 'A lot of things have changed, we are happy.' Another said, 'Things are really good now. We are happy and our residents are happy.'
Programmes
6/10
✓
There was a variety of activities which we saw people enjoying. The activities coordinator knew people's individual preferences.
Points to consider
Staff once failed to call emergency services fast enough for someone, and the council ruled it neglect.
The local authority had investigated an incident where the home failed to seek emergency assistance for person and concluded that this was an act of neglect and may have possibly had a negative impact on the person.
Only standard training and supervisions, no specialist courses or funded qualifications mentioned.
Staff completed an induction training programme and were up to date with mandatory training for their role. Staff had regular supervision.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: May 2021
Requires improvement
Safe
!
Requires improvement
Effective
✓
Good
Caring
✓
Good
Responsive
✓
Good
Management Quality
Well-led: Requires improvement
Staff Reviews
Direct feedback from current and former employees
No one has reviewed yet. Be the first.
Scan the QR code or tap the button to chat with us on WhatsApp. Your identity stays completely anonymous.
Chat on WhatsAppSources
- Care Quality Commission (CQC) Inspection Data
- PlainSight staff reviews