CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Vesta Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection prevention arrangements, including visiting, admissions, testing, cleaning and outbreak management. They were only somewhat assured about the safe and effective use of protective equipment because some mask use was incorrect.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Vesta Lodge was inspected but not rated; infection controls were mostly strong, although mask use was not always correct.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 22 March 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than carrying out a full inspection of the home.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visits, admissions, cleaning, testing and managing infection risks. Visits were planned, visitors were tested and given protective equipment, and new residents completed 14 days of isolation.
The home was clean and had regular infection control audits. Inspectors were somewhat assured about the use of protective equipment because two staff were not wearing masks and one was wearing a mask incorrectly. These issues were dealt with immediately.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for the five key questions.
Planned visiting
The home allowed face-to-face visits and other visits using a screened area. Visitors were given testing, guidance and protective equipment, and visiting areas were cleaned between visits.
“Visits were pre-arranged, with visitors being provided with a rapid test for COVID-19, guidance and personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Safe admissions
Admissions were carefully planned, with each new resident completing a 14-day isolation period.
“Each admission was carefully planned, and a 14-day period of isolation was completed by each person.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with cleaning carried out methodically during the day.
“The service was clean and hygienic. Robust cleaning regimes were in place, which were methodically completed throughout the day.” from the report
Regular checks
The home carried out infection control audits and acted promptly when they found issues. Staff and residents were also tested regularly.
“Regular infection prevention and control audits were completed with action promptly taken to address any issues identified.” from the report
Mask use was inconsistent
needs fixingTwo staff were not wearing face masks and one was not wearing a mask correctly. The issues were addressed immediately, but inspectors were not fully assured about protective equipment use.
“We observed two members of staff who were not wearing face masks within the service and one member of staff who was not wearing their face mask correctly.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that all staff wear face masks correctly and consistently?
- 02What happens if a staff member is not following the home's protective equipment rules?
- 03How are visitors currently tested, given protective equipment and supported during visits?
- 04How do you plan and monitor isolation when someone is newly admitted?
- 05How often are infection prevention and control audits carried out, and can you explain what actions followed the last audit?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide a full service rating or ratings for the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 April 2021 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, September 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a medicines storage issue to address.
This was an unannounced inspection by two inspectors on 21 and 30 August 2019. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, well-managed medicines, clean surroundings and good support from health professionals.
People were treated with kindness and dignity. Their care plans reflected their needs and preferences. People had choices about food, routines, activities and how they were supported. The home also provided personalised end of life care.
Inspectors found that some medicine trolleys had been kept near windows when temperatures reached 24 degrees. No action had been taken at the time to alert the manager. The manager said the trolleys would be returned to the medicine room after medicine rounds.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm interactions and found that staff treated people with dignity, respected privacy and supported individual preferences.
“The atmosphere in the service was calm, compassionate and inclusive.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's routines, likes and dislikes. Staff adapted support when people's needs changed and supported personal choices.
“People and their relatives told us the service was flexible and able to respond to people’s changing needs.” from the report
Activities and inclusion
People were offered activities linked to their interests and cultural backgrounds. Visitors and family members were welcomed.
“People were offered a range of meaningful activities, which had a positive impact on their wellbeing.” from the report
Good management oversight
The home used audits, meetings, feedback and incident reviews to monitor care and make improvements.
“The manager had good oversight of the service with regular manager quality control visits and audits.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found robust recruitment checks and evidence that staff received induction, ongoing training, supervision and competency checks.
“Staff told us, and records confirmed they had supervisions, and observed competency checks and support to carry out their roles effectively.” from the report
Medicine trolley temperatures
needs fixingStaff had recorded temperatures of 24 degrees on several occasions, but had not alerted the manager. The manager said the trolleys would be moved back to the medicine room after rounds because medicines may be affected at 25 degrees.
“We noted staff had recorded temperatures of 24 degrees on several occasions over the past month.” from the report
- 01Where are medicine trolleys stored now, and how are their temperatures checked?
- 02What action is taken if a medicine trolley reaches a temperature that could affect medicines?
- 03How are care plans reviewed when a person's health or support needs change?
- 04How does the home make sure there are enough staff when someone is off sick at short notice?
- 05How are residents and relatives involved in decisions about activities, food and the home environment?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 September 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 Vesta Lodge
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hertfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 82 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%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.