Woodlands food hygiene rating
Caring Premises · Lancaster City
Woodlands holds a 5, the highest food hygiene rating there is. At its last inspection the care premises met every standard the inspector checked, with nothing needing attention.
The rating: 5 - Very good
The rating dates from 15 February 2024, more than 2 years ago. A lot can change in a kitchen in that time, and a rating this old says more about the business then than now. Councils prioritise re-inspecting higher-risk premises, so a long gap often means the business is considered low-risk.
Address: Chestnut Manor, The Green, Bolton le Sands, LA5 8FD
How it compares in Lancaster City
That puts Woodlands among the 865 places in Lancaster City holding top marks, 79% of everywhere the council rates. A 5 is the norm here rather than the exception, so it is the rating to expect, not to be impressed by.
| 5 out of 5 | 865 | 79% | ← Woodlands | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 out of 5 | 173 | 16% | ||
| 3 out of 5 | 44 | 4% | ||
| 2 out of 5 | 12 | 1% | ||
| 1 out of 5 | 5 | <1% | ||
| 0 out of 5 | 2 | <1% |
A further 64 businesses in the area are awaiting inspection or exempt, so are not counted above.
What the inspector found
- Hygienic food handling Very good
- Cleanliness & condition of the building Very good
- How well they manage food safety Very good
An inspection scores three things: how food is handled, the physical condition of the premises, and how much the inspector trusts management to keep standards up. At Woodlands none of the three raised a concern, the overall rating is only ever as strong as its weakest area, so a clean sweep is what produces a high score.
Questions about Woodlands
What is Woodlands's food hygiene rating?
Woodlands has a food hygiene rating of 5 out of 5 (very good), given by Lancaster City Council on 15 February 2024.
Is Woodlands safe to eat at?
The rating covers hygiene standards found at inspection, not the food itself. At 5 out of 5, the inspector found hygiene standards at this care premises to be very good, the top end of the scale.
When was Woodlands last inspected?
Woodlands was last inspected on 15 February 2024, more than 2 years ago. Food hygiene inspections are unannounced, and the rating is published by Lancaster City Council rather than by the business.
What did the inspector find at Woodlands?
The inspector scored three areas. Hygienic food handling was rated "very good", the cleanliness and condition of the building "very good", and confidence in the management of food safety "very good". Lower concern in all three is what earns a high overall rating.
How does Woodlands compare to other places in Lancaster City?
79% of the 1,101 rated food businesses in Lancaster City hold the top rating of 5, and Woodlands is one of them.
Who decides the rating?
Lancaster City Council inspects Woodlands and sets the rating; the Food Standards Agency publishes it. Neither the business nor this site can change a rating, a business that disagrees can appeal to its council, and can request a re-inspection once it has fixed the problems.
Tell me when this changes
The Food Standards Agency publishes only a business's rating today, not what it scored before, and not when it moves. We check every UK rating each night. Watch Woodlands and we will email you the morning after its rating changes.
Free, for three businesses, forever. No password, we send you a link. How rating alerts work →
Understanding this rating
More food hygiene ratings near here
Woodlands is one of 117 rated food businesses in Carnforth. See every hygiene rating in Carnforth →
Lancaster City inspects and rates 1,165 food businesses across its whole area. See every food hygiene rating in Lancaster City →
The official record is held by the council: http://www.lancaster.gov.uk/foodratings
Rating from the Food Standards Agency under the Open Government Licence. Ratings reflect standards found at the time of inspection and can change. If you think a rating is wrong, the official record is held by the FSA and the local authority; corrections there flow through here. How ratings work →