CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at High Worple
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, there were enough suitable staff, and medicines were managed safely. The home was clean, and there were systems for safeguarding, infection control and learning from incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and used to create regularly reviewed care plans. Staff were trained, people had appropriate food and healthcare support, and the home followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were offered choices, involved in decisions and supported to build independence through everyday tasks and community activities.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and communication needs were met, including through Gujarati, pictures and technology. People were supported with activities, relationships, cultural and religious interests, and knew how to complain.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a person-centred culture and effective systems for checking and improving quality. People, relatives and staff were involved through meetings and surveys, and the management team worked with other professionals.
What inspectors found, October 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care that supported people's independence, culture and choices.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 19 September 2023. They spoke with four people, staff and three relatives. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, accidents, audits, meetings and the home.
The home supported five adults with learning disabilities. People shared a cultural background and mainly spoke Gujarati. Staff also spoke Gujarati and understood people's cultural and religious needs.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, personalised support, good links with health professionals and effective management.
Language and culture
Staff spoke people's main language and understood their cultural and religious needs. The home supported religious celebrations and culturally appropriate food.
“All staff spoke Gujarati and understood people's culture and religious needs.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, pursue interests and develop practical skills. This included shopping, cooking, cleaning and learning to travel safely in the community.
“Staff supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control, and independence.” from the report
Kind relationships
People told inspectors staff were kind and polite. Inspectors observed caring interactions and found that people had good relationships with staff.
“We observed gentle, caring interactions which showed mutual respect.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in leisure, educational, social and religious activities at the home and in the community. They were also supported to maintain relationships with friends and family.
“People undertook social and leisure activities in the community, visiting places of interest and following hobbies.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure my relative can communicate comfortably with staff and understand information about their care?
- 02How will you support my relative to set personal goals and develop daily living or community skills?
- 03How are medicines checked, reviewed with health professionals and recorded?
- 04How will you involve our family in care planning, reviews and regular meetings?
- 05What activities, religious support and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control, and it assessed how the home applied the principles of right support, right care and right culture. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 October 2023 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, November 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed support, with some records needing improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 5 October 2017. One inspector spoke with four residents, three relatives, a social care professional, the registered manager and three care workers. The inspector also looked around the home and checked care, staff, medicines, maintenance and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from harm, medicines were recorded properly, staffing was sufficient and the home was clean. They also found that people's health, nutrition, activities, cultural needs and independence were supported.
The home had remained Good since the previous comprehensive inspection on 6 November 2015. Inspectors noted that the temperature of bath and shower water was not being recorded, although risk assessments were added to care records after the inspection.
Medicines and safety
Medicines records checked by inspectors had no unexplained gaps. The home also had arrangements for safeguarding, fire safety and emergency evacuation.
“We examined three medicine administration record (MAR) charts. There were no unexplained gaps.” from the report
Health and nutrition
The home monitored healthcare appointments, dietary needs and people's weights. Staff understood specific needs such as diabetic and low-potassium diets.
“People's healthcare needs were closely monitored by care workers.” from the report
Respect and culture
Staff respected people's privacy, choices, language, culture and religion. Menus and celebrations reflected the backgrounds and preferences of the people living there.
“We saw care workers knocked on people's bedroom doors and waited for the person to respond before entering.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were offered regular activities and outings, and were supported to take part in daily tasks and volunteering.
“The home had a varied and regular programme of activities to ensure that people received adequate social and therapeutic stimulation.” from the report
Management and oversight
The registered manager and area manager carried out regular checks of care, medicines, cleanliness and safety. Staff said communication and management support were good.
“The home had effective quality assurance systems for assessing, monitoring and improving the quality of the service.” from the report
Bath and shower temperature records
needs fixingThe home did not record the temperature of water before people had a bath or shower. The manager said people could check it themselves, and new risk assessments were added to care records after the inspection.
“The temperature of the water prior to people being given a shower or bath had not been recorded.” from the report
Home-specific feedback
minorThe satisfaction survey considered by inspectors included other homes run by the company, so it did not give a clear picture of feedback about this home alone. A new home-specific survey was planned.
“However, this survey was not specific to the home as it included other care homes run by the company.” from the report
- 01How are the new bath and shower temperature risk assessments being followed and recorded now?
- 02How do you check that medicines continue to be given and recorded correctly?
- 03What home-specific feedback have residents and relatives given since the inspection?
- 04How are activities and support adapted when a resident's health, communication or cultural needs change?
- 05How is staffing adjusted if residents' needs or dependency levels increase?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with checks of the home, care and management records, staff records, medicines and maintenance arrangements. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 November 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 High Worple
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 July 2014.
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 Harrow
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 £980 to £1,330 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“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.