CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 188 Whitley Wood Lane Respite Care
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and assessed risks, including falls and epilepsy, were managed. Some actions from a May 2017 legionella risk assessment had not been completed at the time of inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were based on assessments and staff had the knowledge and skills needed to support people. Inspectors recommended updating ongoing staff training, as some training was not in line with current best practice.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were caring, respectful and knew people's preferences well. People's privacy, dignity, confidentiality and independence were supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised around people's needs, preferences and cultural identities. People had access to familiar activities, new activities and local community opportunities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, positive feedback from people, relatives, staff and professionals, and systems to check the quality of care. Audits were used to identify and address issues.
What inspectors found, December 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised respite care, with some outstanding premises and staff training actions.
This was an announced inspection on 7 and 10 November 2017. Inspectors spoke with people using the service, relatives, staff and community professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, training records, safety checks, complaints and other records.
The home provides short respite stays for up to six people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported in line with their preferences. People were helped to stay independent, take part in activities and access the local community.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. It remained Good, the same rating as at the inspection in November 2015. Inspectors identified some actions that still needed attention, including legionella risk assessment work and updating staff training arrangements.
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's preferences, needs and cultural identities. Staff knew how people liked things done and helped them maintain independence.
“People received care and support that was personalised to meet their individual needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw caring and respectful interactions. People and relatives said staff knew them well and supported their privacy and dignity.
“People were treated with care and kindness. Staff showed skill when working with people and it was obvious they knew them well.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored and administered by trained staff who had been assessed as competent. Records were up to date.
“People's medicines were stored and administered safely. Only staff trained in administering medicines and assessed as competent were allowed to do so.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could continue their usual activities, choose things they enjoyed and take part in local community activities.
“People had access to a busy activity schedule.” from the report
Quality checks
The home used regular audits covering care plans, training and other records. Actions were identified and completed when issues were found.
“There was an effective audit system in place that included monthly audits of different aspects of the running of the home including care plans, staff training and other documentation.” from the report
Legionella actions
needs fixingSome actions identified in a May 2017 legionella risk assessment had not been completed when inspectors visited. The manager arranged for the remaining work to be carried out by the end of November 2017 and began developing a monitoring process.
“We found some issues identified on a legionella risk assessment from May 2017 had not been actioned.” from the report
Staff training updates
needs fixingSome ongoing training arrangements did not match current best practice. For example, emergency first aid was updated every three years rather than annually, and some recommended topics were not included.
“We recommend that the provider bring the staff training provision in line with the current best practice guidance on ongoing training for social care staff.” from the report
Premises improvements
minorRedecoration work had been identified but there was not yet a plan. The manager also planned to assess the premises and make changes to support a person with early dementia.
“At the time of our inspection the plan for the redecoration had not been drawn up.” from the report
- 01Has all the work identified in the May 2017 legionella risk assessment now been completed, and how is it being monitored?
- 02How often is each type of staff training updated now, including emergency first aid?
- 03What changes have been made to the premises to make them more suitable for someone with early dementia?
- 04How will the home record and meet my relative's communication needs in accessible formats?
- 05How will my relative's usual activities, interests, cultural needs and community links be included during each respite stay?
This was an announced inspection covering all five key questions; the previous Good ratings from November 2015 remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 December 2017 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.
Every inspection of 188 Whitley Wood Lane Respite Care
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at 188 Whitley Wood Lane Respite Care →
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 April 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Reading
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 £1,010 to £1,270 a week. 86 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
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.