CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Well Springs Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection prevention and control arrangements, including visits, testing, hygiene, admissions and outbreak management. They found inconsistent use of eye protection by staff.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed as a separate question in this targeted inspection. The manager responded immediately to the PPE issue by reviewing guidance and risk assessments.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found mostly safe infection control, but staff were not always using eye protection correctly.
This was a targeted inspection on 12 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during COVID-19 outbreaks, and on whether staffing pressures affected care. The inspection was announced one day in advance.
Inspectors were assured about most infection control arrangements. These included visiting, social distancing, admissions, testing, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy. They were also assured that vaccination requirements were being met.
Inspectors found inconsistent use of eye protection by staff around the home. The manager immediately reviewed and updated the guidance and risk assessments, and told staff that eye protection must be worn during a COVID-19 outbreak.
The service was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of all five areas of care, so it does not give a current overall quality rating.
Consistent agency staffing
Where agency staff were needed, the home block booked the same staff and checked they were not working in other care homes.
“The registered manager made sure, where agency staff were used, they ensured consistency by block booking the same staff” from the report
Staff deployment
Staff were assigned to specific areas of the home. Inspectors said this gave staff more time with people and helped reduce the spread of COVID-19.
“Staff had been divided to work in specific areas of the home to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.” from the report
Most infection controls assured
Inspectors were assured about arrangements covering visitors, social distancing, admissions, testing, hygiene, outbreaks and the infection control policy.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inconsistent eye protection
needs fixingStaff were not consistently using eye protection around the home. The manager updated the guidance and risk assessments immediately, but the report identifies this as a gap in infection control practice.
“During our site visit, we identified the inconsistent use of PPE, namely eye protection, by staff around the home.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that all staff wear eye protection during a COVID-19 outbreak?
- 02What changed in the PPE guidance and risk assessments after the inspection?
- 03How do you check that agency staff are not also working in other care homes?
- 04How are staff assigned to specific areas of the home during an outbreak?
- 05What were the home's most recent results for infection control checks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures during COVID-19; it was not a full assessment of all five care questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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, August 2018
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring; inspectors found kind, safe care but noted two minor record-keeping issues.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 June 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and managers. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines records, audits and other documents. They also observed care, lunch, the home and the grounds.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. Caring improved from Good to Outstanding. Inspectors found exceptionally kind and respectful care, enough staff, detailed care plans, safe medicines management and good support with food, healthcare and activities.
The report mentions two areas needing attention. It was sometimes difficult to track some creams and nutritional supplements on the electronic records. Two people were not weighed as often as their care plans required, but the manager acted immediately when this was raised. No regulations were breached and inspectors found no serious risks or concerns.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found a strong culture of dignity, compassion and person-centred care. Staff spent time talking with people and supported their individual interests and choices.
“During the visit we observed staff demonstrating exceptionally high levels of kind and compassionate care and interaction towards people, treating them with the utmost care and respect.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to provide care and keep the home clean. Recruitment checks were in place and people's requests for help were answered promptly.
“There were enough staff on duty to care for people safely and keep the home clean.” from the report
Personalised care planning
Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences and communication requirements. Staff knew people well and were able to follow the plans.
“Care records were computerised and showed people's needs had been assessed in a range of areas with detailed and person-centred care plans in place for staff to follow.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used audits, surveys and outside reviews to check the service. Inspectors found that action was taken when shortfalls were identified.
“The provider had robust quality assurance and monitoring systems in place.” from the report
Some medicines records were unclear
needs fixingIt was sometimes difficult to track when nutritional supplements and creams had been given on the electronic care record. The manager was asked to make this clearer.
“It was sometimes difficult to track administration of these medicines; we spoke with the manager about the need to make this clearer” from the report
Two weight checks were overdue
needs fixingTwo people were not weighed at the frequency set out in their care plans. The manager took immediate action after inspectors raised this.
“We did identify that two people were not being weighed at the frequency set out in their care plan.” from the report
- 01How do you now record creams and nutritional supplements so it is clear when they have been given?
- 02How do you make sure people's weights are checked as often as their care plans require?
- 03Has the new manager completed their application for registration with CQC?
- 04How are people and relatives involved in reviewing care plans and important decisions?
- 05What activities and opportunities are available for someone with my relative's interests and communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating; the report used a shorter format because the overall Good rating had not changed. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 August 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 Well Springs Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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
99 live-in carers within about an hour of Bradford
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. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.