CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Washington Manor Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management and records, and investigations into incidents and accidents. The full Safe question was not assessed.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff treated them well and with respect. The full Caring question was not assessed.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider had started an improvement plan and changes to staffing and training. The full Well-led question was not assessed.
What inspectors found, September 2020
Washington Manor Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found improvements in medicines, staffing and dignity, but relatives wanted better communication.
This was a targeted inspection on 22 July 2020. Inspectors looked at specific concerns about medicines, staffing, dignity, incidents and communication. They spoke with people using the home, reviewed records and contacted relatives.
People told inspectors they felt safe, received medicines on time and were treated with respect. Inspectors found enough staff on duty, safe medicines records and investigations of incidents and accidents.
The provider had accepted the concerns and created an action plan. Changes had started, including reviewing staffing, improving training and planning better communication with residents and relatives.
The home was inspected but not rated at this visit. The previous overall rating was Good and remained unchanged, because this inspection did not assess the full key questions.
Medicines
People said they received their medicines when due. Records were kept and senior staff checked that agreed medicines procedures were followed.
“Medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff were visible and responded quickly when people asked for help.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Respectful care
People said staff were friendly, kind and respectful. Inspectors observed friendly and professional interactions.
“Staff treated people with dignity and respect.” from the report
Improvement work
The provider had accepted the concerns and created a detailed action plan. Changes had already begun in staffing, training and development.
“The provider was proactive in developing a robust action plan to improve the quality of care provided.” from the report
Communication with relatives
needs fixingRelatives were mostly positive but said the home should be more proactive in keeping them updated. The improvement plan included meetings and a suggestion box.
“Relatives gave mostly positive feedback, however they felt communication could be improved.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with the provider's action plan since this inspection?
- 02How will you keep relatives more regularly and proactively updated?
- 03Who is currently managing the home, and when do you expect a new registered manager to be in place?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels and the staff skill mix remain suitable for residents' needs?
- 05Have all staff completed the planned medicines refresher training and person-centred care awareness sessions?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns about medicines, staffing, dignity, incidents and communication; it did not assess the full key questions, so the previous Good rating carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 September 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, November 2019
Rated Good after significant improvements, with safe, kind and personalised care found across the home.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 14 and 15 October 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely, staffing had improved, care plans were more detailed and people's rights under the Mental Capacity Act were being followed.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement, with several legal breaches. The provider had made significant progress, and the home was no longer in breach of regulations at this inspection.
Medicines were safer
Medicines were administered, stored, recorded and disposed of appropriately. Managers checked that staff followed the correct procedures.
“The provider now followed safe practices when administering medicines, which were in line with best practice.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans had been reviewed and gave clearer guidance about people's needs, preferences and how care should be provided.
“People's care plans had been reviewed and updated since the last inspection. They were now detailed and person-centred, with specific guidance on how people wanted their care provided.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives said staff were kind, considerate and respectful. Inspectors found that people were involved in choices and supported to be independent.
“People told us they were well cared for and staff were kind and considerate.” from the report
Stronger management checks
The home had introduced more comprehensive checks, with additional oversight from senior management and the quality team.
“The quality assurance system was now fully embedded into the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you make sure medicines remain safely managed and that any errors are identified quickly?
- 02Have all staff now completed safeguarding training, and how is their understanding checked?
- 03How often are my relative's care plans and risk assessments reviewed and updated?
- 04How will you support my relative's individual nutrition, healthcare, communication and activity needs?
- 05How do you use feedback, complaints and incident records to make further improvements?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection covering all five CQC questions, after the previous Requires Improvement rating and legal breaches. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 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 Washington Manor Care Home
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not ratedCaring: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland
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 £950 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in 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.