CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 110 West Street Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, safe admissions, PPE, testing, outbreak management and visiting arrangements. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
110 West Street Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and safe visiting arrangements.
This was a targeted inspection on 8 February 2022. It looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care. The inspection was announced with one day's notice.
Inspectors found staff using protective equipment properly and following good infection control practices. People had individual COVID-19 risk assessments and care plans. The home also used air filtration units in communal areas.
People could receive visitors safely through pre-booked visits, or keep in touch by video call. Inspectors were assured about testing, admissions, cleaning, social distancing, outbreak planning and vaccination requirements for staff and visiting professionals.
The home was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of all five areas of care, so the report does not provide an overall quality rating.
Infection control
Staff were observed using protective equipment correctly and following good infection control practices.
“We observed staff following good infection prevention and control practices including appropriate use of Personal Protective Equipment in line with government guidance.” from the report
Individual risk planning
People had individual COVID-19 risk assessments and care plans that considered their health, social care needs and community access.
“The people who used the service had COVID-19 risk assessments and care plans in place which were individual to them” from the report
Family contact
The home supported visits and offered video calls so people could maintain contact with family and friends.
“The service supported people to maintain relationships with families and friends, either by visiting within the home or via video calls.” from the report
Monitoring and facilities
The registered manager used COVID-19 audits, and air filtration units had been installed in communal areas.
“Filtration units had been fitted to communal areas of the service to circulate and filter air in the communal areas.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are COVID-19-related staffing pressures affecting staffing levels and people's care now?
- 02How are visitors currently booked and supported to visit safely?
- 03How often are people's infection risk assessments and care plans reviewed?
- 04How do you check that staff use PPE, wash their hands and follow infection control procedures?
- 05What testing and vaccination checks are currently required for staff and visiting professionals?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and highly personalised support, while noting the home is larger than current best-practice guidance.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days. One inspector spoke with five people, four relatives and 11 staff. They reviewed care records, medicine records, recruitment files, training information and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, detailed risk assessments and strong safeguarding practice.
People received highly personalised support and were helped to make choices, build skills and become more independent. Staff were described as kind and well trained. The home did not use restraint, seclusion or segregation during the inspection.
The previous rating was Outstanding, published in March 2017. Effective, Caring and Responsive were then rated Outstanding, but were Good at this inspection. Safe and Well-led remained Good.
Personalised, caring support
Inspectors found warm relationships and support that focused closely on each person's wishes, needs and goals.
“People and their families received outstanding high-quality, person-centred care from a caring and exceptionally well-led service.” from the report
Promoting independence
People were helped to learn practical skills, use community facilities and take carefully considered positive risks.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Least restrictive approach
The home used positive behaviour support and worked to reduce restrictions. No restrictive intervention practices were being used at the inspection.
“The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.” from the report
Detailed understanding of people
The home used detailed personal information and communication methods to help staff understand people's needs, preferences and aspirations.
“Each person had an 'All about me' file which had been drawn up with them and provided a clear picture of everything about the person including their needs, wishes, fears and aspirations.” from the report
Strong staff preparation
New staff received a lengthy induction, specialist training and mentoring before taking on complex support. Existing staff received regular supervision and appraisal.
“New staff completed an eight-day induction over a four-week period and a three-day SCIP (Strategies for crisis intervention and prevention) course before starting work at the service” from the report
Larger than current guidance
minorThe home accommodates 17 people across three adjoining houses. Inspectors said this was larger than current best-practice guidance, although the building design and surrounding residential setting reduced the impact.
“This is larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01How would you support my relative if they arrived in crisis or had previously experienced a placement breakdown?
- 02How are positive risks assessed and reviewed when people want to travel independently or take part in activities in the community?
- 03How would you use the person's 'All about me' file and preferred communication methods in their daily support?
- 04What specialist training would the staff supporting my relative have, and how would new or agency staff learn their care plan before working with them?
- 05If my relative moved towards supported living, how would you prepare them and introduce them to the new staff and home?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five rating areas, including the care provided and the care-home premises; inspectors also reviewed records and spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of 110 West Street Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Outstanding to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Gooddown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.