CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Villa Scalabrini
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed through screening, testing, PPE, cleaning and updated policies. The provider also had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 infection controls and flexible visiting arrangements.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. They also asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, arranging testing, managing visitors and admissions, and keeping its infection control policy up to date. The home was clean and tidy, with cleaning schedules in place.
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through indoor and outdoor visits, telephone and video calls. The home also offered on-site accommodation for some visitors who needed to stay longer.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a full quality rating for the home or for most of the five key questions.
Infection checks
Visitors were screened for symptoms, had temperature checks and showed lateral flow test results. Staff and professional visitors were also asked about vaccination status.
“Processes were in place to reduce risks of COVID-19.” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Staff were seen using PPE correctly and had access to more supplies if needed. They had training in PPE, COVID-19 and infection control.
“Staff were observed to be wearing PPE correctly and told us they had access to more if needed.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy. Regular daily, weekly and monthly cleaning schedules were in place, including cleaning between visits.
“The service was clean and tidy and had no mal odours.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home offered several ways for people to keep in touch with friends and relatives, including indoor, outdoor, telephone and video contact.
“People and relatives told us they were happy with the current visiting options and information that was shared with them.” from the report
Support for longer visits
The home offered on-site accommodation for people travelling long distances or visiting someone at the end of their life.
“For visitors who were travelling long distances or for those who were supporting people at the end of their life and needed to visit for longer periods, the provider offered accommodation onsite” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing any staffing pressures caused by COVID-19?
- 02Which indoor, outdoor and bedroom visiting options are available now?
- 03How do you support people who cannot make their own decisions about testing or visiting?
- 04How often are visiting areas cleaned, and how is this recorded?
- 05What is the home's latest full inspection rating for areas not covered by this targeted inspection?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the home was inspected but not rated and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 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, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection controls in several areas but unsafe use of some protective equipment.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 26 January 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control because the home had a COVID-19 outbreak.
Inspectors were assured about visitor checks, testing, shielding, social distancing, safe admissions, outbreak management and the infection control policy. The home had also created a separate visiting room, although visits were temporarily stopped during the outbreak.
Inspectors were not assured that all protective equipment was being used safely. Some staff wore extra items without training, which created a possible infection risk. Cleaning schedules and environmental checks also did not give enough detail.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall Good, Requires Improvement or Inadequate rating.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors were screened, had their temperatures checked and were required to use hand gel and protective equipment.
“Visitors were screened and had their temperatures checked by staff on arrival.” from the report
Separate visiting room
The home had adapted an office into a visiting room with a partition, window and intercom. It allowed visitors to enter from outside without going through other areas of the home.
“The room had been partitioned with a large window in place, along with an intercom, where visitors can enter the room via an external door without access to any other areas of the service.” from the report
Testing and isolation
People and staff took part in routine testing. People who tested positive were supported to isolate in their bedrooms for 14 days, and staff were allocated to one unit.
“People and staff had engaged with the routine testing scheme.” from the report
Protective equipment
seriousSome staff wore extra protective items, including coveralls and additional gloves, without training on how to put them on, remove them or dispose of them safely. Inspectors said this created a potential risk of spreading infection.
“Processes that staff were following did not meet good practice guidelines and posed a potential risk of transmission of infection.” from the report
Cleaning records and checks
needs fixingThe home appeared clean, but cleaning schedules did not explain the required tasks, equipment or materials in enough detail. Environmental audits did not cover all infection control practices.
“However cleaning schedules in place were not robust and did not give sufficient detail to housekeeping staff as to the tasks they were to complete and the equipment and materials to use.” from the report
- 01What training have staff received on safely putting on, removing and disposing of all protective equipment?
- 02Are staff still using coveralls, sleeve covers or extra gloves, and if so, why?
- 03How are cleaning tasks, equipment and materials now recorded and checked?
- 04How do environmental audits now cover all infection prevention and control practices?
- 05What arrangements are currently in place for visits and managing any new COVID-19 outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 February 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.
Every inspection of Villa Scalabrini
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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.