CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The White House (Curdridge) Limited
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and risks were generally well managed. Inspectors noted that work was underway to improve the detail and robustness of some risk assessments.
- Effective?
- Outstanding
- The environment was designed around the needs of people living with dementia and supported wellbeing, independence and freedom of movement. Staff worked well with health professionals and had personalised training.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff built warm, respectful relationships and treated people as individuals. People were supported to make choices, remain independent and maintain their dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People had personalised care and many daily activities, including access to a day centre and community outings. This rating had fallen from Outstanding at the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open culture, stable staff team and visible management. Audits, meetings and action plans were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, May 2020
The White House (Curdridge) Limited is rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptional care, with some risk assessments still being improved.
This was an unannounced planned inspection in February 2020. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management information.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Care was especially strong for people living with dementia and other mental health conditions. Inspectors found highly personalised support, kind relationships, good staff training, an environment that promoted freedom and independence, and many activities.
Safe, responsive and well-led were rated Good. Medicines, staffing and safeguarding were managed safely. The home had a positive culture and good systems for listening to people and improving care.
The overall rating stayed Outstanding from the previous inspection. Effective and Caring stayed Outstanding, while Safe and Well-led stayed Good. Responsive fell from Outstanding to Good.
Personalised dementia care
Staff understood people's individual needs and adapted their approach, including when people had complex or challenging behaviours.
“Staff working at The White House understood the needs of people using the service and supported people in an exceptionally personalised way.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives consistently described staff as caring. Inspectors observed warm interactions and saw that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“All the interactions we observed between people and staff were positive and friendly.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
The building and gardens supported freedom of movement, independence and wellbeing. People could use the spaces without unnecessary restrictions.
“The environment had been designed and adapted to help people living with dementia manage their surroundings, retain their independence, and reduce feelings of confusion and anxiety.” from the report
Activities and social life
People could choose from a wide range of activities, including arts, music, outings, entertainers and time at the attached day centre.
“The service arranged a wealth of activities for people to choose from.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff, prompt responses to requests and safe systems for ordering, recording and giving medicines.
“There were sufficient numbers of qualified, skilled and experienced staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Some risk assessments needed more detail
minorMost risks were assessed and managed, but some assessments were less detailed. The home was working to improve their quality and robustness.
“Work was underway to further improve the quality and robustness of some of the risk assessments that were less detailed.” from the report
Responsive rating had fallen
needs fixingResponsive care was rated Good instead of Outstanding. The report still found personalised care and many activities, but families should ask what led to the change and what is being done to regain the higher rating.
“At this inspection this key question has deteriorated to good.” from the report
- 01Which risk assessments were found to be less detailed, and have they now been improved?
- 02Why did the Responsive rating fall from Outstanding to Good at this inspection?
- 03How will you keep my relative's care plan and communication plan up to date as their needs change?
- 04How are staffing levels adjusted when people's care needs increase?
- 05How can my relative take part in activities, use the gardens or attend the day centre if they do not want to join group activities?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care home, covering the premises and care provided; all five key questions were assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 May 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.
What inspectors found, July 2017
The White House (Curdridge) Limited was rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found excellent personalised care, with minor gaps in some recruitment records.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 22 and 24 May 2017. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and health professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines, recruitment records and management records.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Effective, caring and responsive care were rated Outstanding. Safe and well-led were rated Good. People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood dementia. Inspectors found kind care, good health support, varied activities, suitable surroundings and enough staff.
The report also noted a small weakness in some recruitment records. Some employment dates were incomplete, so gaps between jobs could not always be checked. The manager had introduced a risk assessment format for staff records.
Specialist dementia care
Staff received specialist training and understood how to communicate with people living with dementia. Inspectors found that this knowledge supported personalised care.
“Staff had the specialist knowledge and skills required to meet people's needs living with dementia.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people's likes, dislikes and preferred ways of receiving care.
“The atmosphere throughout the home was friendly, calm and caring.” from the report
Choice and activities
People could choose activities and outings, including trips into the community. Staff also found ways to involve people who were cared for in bed.
“People were able to choose what activities they took part in and suggest other activities they would like to undertake.” from the report
Staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines records showed people received medicines as prescribed and staff were assessed as competent.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's care needs.” from the report
Incomplete employment dates
minorSome staff records gave only the years of employment, not the actual dates. This meant gaps between jobs could not always be identified and checked, although the manager had introduced a new risk assessment format.
“Therefore it was not possible to identify whether there were any gaps between jobs and ensure these were followed up in interview.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every staff member's full employment history is recorded and any gaps are followed up?
- 02How would you adapt activities and daily routines to match my relative's interests and changing dementia needs?
- 03How are relatives involved in reviewing care plans and decisions about changes in care?
- 04How do you monitor medicines, including medicines given only when needed for pain or anxiety?
- 05How would you respond if my relative became distressed or refused personal care?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the first day unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 July 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of The White House (Curdridge) Limited
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- May 2020Outstandingcurrent ratingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The White House (Curdridge) Limited →
- July 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The White House (Curdridge) Limited →
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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.