CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Worthies
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, visiting, social distancing and outbreak management. The home also had plans to manage staffing pressures and the lift replacement.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection, although people appeared well cared for and expressed satisfaction with their care and support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection, although the report describes arrangements for family visits and daily activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection, although inspectors reported that policies, quality checks and contingency plans were in place for the pandemic.
What inspectors found, January 2022
The Worthies was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements and plans to manage staffing pressures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inspectors also asked about staffing pressures. The report gives the inspection date as 08 January 2022 in one section and 12 January 2022 on the report front page.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, supporting testing, managing visits and admissions, and keeping its infection-control policy up to date. Visitors had health checks, showed a negative lateral flow test and followed the home's safety arrangements.
The home had plans for the lift replacement, including extra staff at busy times and a lounge area to reduce isolation. People appeared well cared for, and relatives told inspectors they were satisfied with how the pandemic had been managed.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall rating or a rating for all five areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements to prevent and manage infection. Staff had recent infection-control training and checks were made on PPE and hand washing.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Safe visiting
The home used health declarations, testing, PPE and visitor records. It also provided different ways for relatives to visit, including a garden visitors' pod.
“Arrangements for visiting were displayed clearly so health and social care professionals, friends and family knew what was expected of them to keep people safe.” from the report
Plans for disruption
The home had contingency plans for the lift replacement and possible staffing pressures. Staffing was planned to increase at busy mealtimes.
“Contingency plans were in place. Staffing was being increased at peak times such as mealtimes.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People had daily activities and were supported to keep in touch with family. Relatives contacted by inspectors were satisfied with the home's management of the pandemic and communication.
“Daily activities were organised for people to help with their wellbeing.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection-control arrangements are in place now, including PPE, testing, visiting and outbreak management?
- 02How many staff are scheduled at busy times, and how would staffing be maintained if there were COVID-19-related absences?
- 03Has the lift replacement been completed, and are there any continuing effects on people's access around the home?
- 04How are relatives kept informed, and what visiting options are available if there is an outbreak?
- 05What are the home's current ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led, since this inspection did not assess those areas?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not assess or rate the other four areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 January 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, June 2018
The Worthies was rated Good; inspectors found caring and safer support, but management continuity and record-keeping still needed attention.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 8 and 10 May 2018. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They reviewed care records, staff records, rotas, medicines checks and quality audits.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were described as receiving care that met their needs, with access to health professionals and support to remain independent.
The inspection was brought forward after concerns from whistleblowers and the local authority about care, the culture, the environment and staff turnover. The provider had acted on earlier problems, including medicines safety, and had brought in extra management support.
Some improvements were still being made. These included updating care plans, improving daily records, addressing management turnover, reducing odours and reviewing mealtime arrangements. The overall Good rating means inspectors judged the service to be performing well, although it was not without shortcomings.
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with dignity and staff took time to understand their interests, choices and personal histories.
“People were treated in a dignified, caring manner, which demonstrated that their rights were protected.” from the report
Safer medicines
The provider had introduced regular medicines checks, staff competency assessments and clearer guidance. Improvements had been seen since the previous inspection.
“Medicines were well managed with people receiving their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Good response to health needs
Staff made prompt referrals and followed professional advice. People could access a range of health professionals when they became unwell or needed specialist support.
“Visiting professionals confirmed the staff were prompt in alerting them to any concerns and followed any advice they were given.” from the report
People's choices and interests
People were supported to make everyday choices, stay independent and take part in activities or interests that mattered to them.
“Care plans included information to encourage people to maintain skills such as washing, dressing and eating.” from the report
Management turnover
needs fixingThere had been several changes in care manager and senior management roles. Extra managers were supporting the home while the provider worked towards longer-term stability.
“A visiting health care professional shared with us their concerns about the lack of continuity in the management.” from the report
Care records needed correction
needs fixingSome care plans lacked important information, used the wrong gender or referred to another service. Inspectors also found conflicting information about mental capacity and daily notes that were too task-focused.
“Some areas such as supporting a person with their diabetes and supporting them when they were upset, anxious or aggressive were not available in the care file.” from the report
Environmental and mealtime issues
minorOdours were still noticeable at times. Some people waited longer than others for meals, and some corridors were bland or narrow. The provider said these areas were being reviewed.
“The home did at times have odours that were noticeable as found at the last inspection.” from the report
- 01Who is responsible for the home day to day now, and how often will they be present?
- 02How do you check that every care plan is accurate, current and specific to the person?
- 03What has been done to prevent the odours that inspectors noticed?
- 04How do you make sure everyone receives their meal promptly and at the same time as others at their table?
- 05What activities are available when the activity co-ordinator is not working?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, including concerns about care, staffing, management and the environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 June 2018 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 Worthies
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 January 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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough 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.