CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Willows
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that staff were safely recruited, knew how to respond to safeguarding concerns and managed medicines correctly. Risk assessments, emergency plans, building checks and incident reviews were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and supervision and supported people with communication, health appointments, eating and drinking. However, the building and campus location did not meet the principles of the newer Registering the Right Support guidance.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They supported choice, privacy, independence and contact with relatives.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were individual, up to date and reviewed monthly. People were offered activities, communication in formats they could understand and support to spend time with family and in the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management structure had been strengthened with two deputy managers. The service used meetings, questionnaires, audits and reviews to monitor quality, but inspectors found no evidence that the Registering the Right Support principles were being considered in future planning.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Rated Good, down from Outstanding; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but concerns about the institutional setting and limited community access.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 8 and 9 November 2018. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors visited the home, reviewed records and spoke with staff, relatives and health and social care professionals.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, detailed care plans, trained staff and kind, respectful support.
The rating fell from Outstanding at the previous inspection in November 2015. This was because the home did not meet newer guidance about choice, independence, inclusion and living as ordinary a life as any citizen. Inspectors felt the building, campus setting and some staff practices could feel institutional and less homely.
Safe support
Inspectors found safe recruitment, appropriate staffing and good systems for medicines, safeguarding, emergencies and incident reviews.
“We found that the home was a safe environment for people, who were supported by properly recruited staff who administered their medication correctly” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received a wide range of training, including specialist training to support the individual needs of people living there.
“Staff were well-trained and supervised and had the skills and knowledge to deliver effective support to people living in the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed empathy and respectful communication. Relatives and professionals also said that people were treated with kindness, dignity and compassion.
“We saw that staff treated people with dignity and respect and this was confirmed by their relatives.” from the report
Individual care planning
Care records were personalised and included information about communication, preferences, risks and support needs. Relatives were involved in reviews.
“The care files were very person-centred throughout. They were up to date and informative” from the report
Activities and family contact
People were supported to choose activities, go out, work, attend social activities and keep in touch with relatives.
“There was a range of activities which people were able to choose and participate in outside the home” from the report
Institutional feel
needs fixingThe size, layout and some staff practices meant that the home did not fully feel or operate like a person's own home.
“Certain physical aspects to the building and staff practices felt institutional and detracted from a homely atmosphere.” from the report
Limited community access
needs fixingThe home was on a campus rather than in an ordinary community. Inspectors said it was difficult to access the local community without a vehicle.
“The building is on a campus and does not lie within the heart of the ordinary community which is difficult to access other than by a vehicle.” from the report
Future planning
needs fixingInspectors found no evidence that the principles of Registering the Right Support were being considered when planning the future development of the service.
“There was no evidence that the principles of Registering the Right Support were being considered in the planning and development of the service moving forward.” from the report
- 01What is being done to make the building feel more like a person's home and less institutional?
- 02How will my relative access ordinary community activities if they do not have regular access to a vehicle?
- 03How are the principles of Registering the Right Support being included in the home's future plans?
- 04How will my relative be supported to make everyday choices about activities, food, clothing and how they spend their time?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing and changing individual care plans?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the first day unannounced and the second day used partly to review records at the provider's headquarters. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 February 2019 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 The Willows
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Outstanding to Good.
- February 2019Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 April 2015.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Wirral
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 £1,230 a week. 37 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.