CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wagstaff Way
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection risks. This included visitor screening, social distancing, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak planning.
- 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, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were keeping people safe during the pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 2 November 2020. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control measures as part of a national review during the coronavirus pandemic.
The inspectors found good practice. Visitors were screened, information about the pandemic was provided in different formats, staff had guidance about protective equipment, shifts were staggered, and cleaning checks had been increased.
The home was judged to be following safe infection prevention and control procedures. It was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a standard overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors completed health screening, and the home had a visitor protocol based on current guidance.
“A health screening questionnaire was completed when visitors arrived at the home.” from the report
Clear information for residents
Information about the pandemic was provided in different formats, including pictures. Inspectors said this helped people manage anxiety.
“The information had successfully supported people to manage their levels of anxiety.” from the report
Staff infection control guidance
Staff had an information pack explaining the practices they needed to follow, including when to wear protective equipment.
“The information outlined the practices staff needed to follow to keep themselves and others safe during the pandemic.” from the report
Cleaning and monitoring
Cleaning was increased and extra audits were used to check cleanliness and staff compliance with infection control policies.
“Cleaning schedules had been increased and additional audits had been implemented to monitor cleanliness and staff compliance with the provider's infection control policy.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors screened and what happens if someone has symptoms of infection?
- 02How are staff trained and checked on the correct use of personal protective equipment?
- 03How often are cleaning audits completed, and what happens when they identify a problem?
- 04How does the home support residents who become anxious about infection control measures?
- 05Can you show us the home's latest infection prevention and control policy and explain how it is reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 November 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, February 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but some medicine and recruitment records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 20 January 2020. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and social care professionals. They observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home supported four people, with space for five, who may have a learning disability and/or autism. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with dignity and supported to make choices, build independence, maintain family relationships and take part in community activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 12 September 2017. Inspectors did identify some gaps in medicine records and staff employment histories.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw positive interactions. Staff listened to people, respected their privacy and encouraged independence with everyday tasks.
“Positive interactions between people and staff were observed throughout the day. People were spoken with respectfully by staff and were listened to.” from the report
Community and independence
People were supported to use local facilities, attend college and clubs, go shopping, eat out and take holidays.
“A person said, "I go out a lot. I eat out, go shopping and do what I want to.” from the report
Staff knowledge and support
Staff received induction, mandatory and specialist training, supervision and appraisals. Staff knew how to support people's individual needs.
“People were supported by staff who knew them and their needs well.” from the report
Handwritten medicine records
needs fixingSeveral medicine administration records were handwritten, but there was no record that two staff had checked them. This could increase the risk of an error.
“However, it had not been documented that two staff had checked to ensure what had been handwritten on the MAR was correct to reduce the risk of error.” from the report
Short-term medicine care plans
needs fixingCare plans were not being used for short-term medicines such as antibiotics. The report says these plans should explain what staff must watch for, such as an allergic reaction.
“Care plans were not used where medicines had been prescribed on a short-term basis including, antibiotics.” from the report
- 01How do you now check handwritten medicine administration records before they are used?
- 02What care plans are now in place for short-term medicines such as antibiotics?
- 03Have all staff employment histories been updated to include the month and year?
- 04What specialist training do staff receive to support people with autism and their individual needs?
- 05How will you involve our relative and family in care reviews and decisions?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five rating areas, including the care provided and the premises; four people lived at the home at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 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.
Every inspection of Wagstaff Way
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Solihull
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.