CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Signature at Weybridge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe and staff understood their risks and care needs. Staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control were found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed assessments, trained staff and support with food, drinks and healthcare. The home was adapted for mobility and dementia needs, although some capacity and best-interest records were being improved.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, polite and respectful. People were involved in their care and supported to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences, communication needs and life stories. People were supported with activities, relationships, visitors, complaints and end-of-life wishes, although some people thought activities could be improved.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear management arrangements, regular audits and action plans. New governance tools and meeting records were still being developed, but inspectors saw evidence that actions were followed up.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and activities still being improved.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection because of a change of provider. Three inspectors visited on 24 May 2022. They spoke with 12 people, four relatives and 10 staff, observed care and checked medicines, care records, recruitment files and quality monitoring.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, staff knew them well, and help was available promptly. Inspectors found personalised care, safe medicines support, good infection control and suitable support with food, healthcare, activities and relationships.
The management team had systems to monitor quality and acted when they found problems. Some capacity and best-interest records were being improved, and some people thought activities could be better. Good means the inspectors found consistent standards, although there was still room for improvement.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff understood individual risks and used appropriate equipment and support to reduce avoidable harm.
“People told us they felt safe in the home and with staff.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people's histories, preferences and communication needs. Care was adjusted to support independence and individual wellbeing.
“People's care was personalised and responsive to their wishes and preferences.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff as caring, polite and respectful. Inspectors saw people being involved in decisions and supported to do things for themselves.
“People felt staff were caring, polite and kind to them.” from the report
Strong oversight
Managers used audits and action plans to monitor safety and quality. They reviewed incidents and used lessons learned to make improvements.
“The management team completed a range of safety and quality audits with clear action plans in place to address any improvement areas.” from the report
Some activities could be better
minorPeople were generally positive about activities, but some felt there was room for improvement. Ask how the activity programme is shaped around individual interests.
“People were overall complimentary around things to do available in the home, but some thought they could be improved.” from the report
Capacity records being improved
minorThe home was reviewing capacity assessments, best-interest decisions and deprivation of liberty applications at the time of inspection. Ask what has since been completed.
“The management team were reviewing and improving the capacity assessment and best interests' decision records.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to capacity assessments, best-interest records and deprivation of liberty applications since the inspection?
- 02How do residents choose activities, and what has been done in response to people who felt activities could be improved?
- 03How do you check that staffing levels remain sufficient at busy times and when people's needs change?
- 04How are medicines errors reviewed, and what training or changes follow any incident?
- 05How will you keep relatives informed and involved in care plan reviews?
This was an unannounced planned inspection following a change of provider and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 July 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 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, safe visiting arrangements and enough staff during COVID-19 pressures.
This was a short-notice, announced inspection on 18 February 2022. It was a targeted check of infection control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. They found effective use of personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning and social distancing. The home also had arrangements to support visits and keep relatives informed.
There were enough staff to meet people's needs, with plans to cover staff shortages. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Staffing cover
The home had enough staff and a plan to cover shortages caused by isolation or positive COVID-19 tests.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors found enhanced cleaning, suitable protective equipment, regular testing and an up-to-date infection control policy.
“People were protected from the spread of infection by enhanced cleaning that had been introduced at the location.” from the report
Safe family visits
The home had arrangements that allowed people to stay in contact with relatives while following infection control guidance.
“Measures had been put in place to ensure people could have as much contact with their relatives as possible.” from the report
Communication with relatives
The management team sent relatives a weekly bulletin with updates about the home and changes to guidance.
“This bulletin contained updates for relatives of what was happening in the home and updates in changes to guidance and how the home were responding.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visiting arrangements different now from those inspected on 18 February 2022?
- 02What happens if there are staff shortages because staff are off sick or isolating?
- 03How are residents supported if they test positive for COVID-19 or need to self-isolate?
- 04How will relatives receive updates about changes to visiting arrangements and infection control guidance?
- 05When was the home last assessed on care planning, activities and residents' day-to-day experience?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection of all five CQC questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 April 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.
Every inspection of Signature at Weybridge
2 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 2021.
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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.