CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Welland House Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had effective infection prevention and control arrangements. They checked areas including PPE, testing, admissions, cleaning, visits and the management of outbreaks.
- 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, January 2022
Welland House Care Centre was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements for its designated COVID-19 setting.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 20 December 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control because the home was being considered as a designated setting for people leaving hospital with COVID-19.
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing, safe admissions and visits. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.
The home had a separate area with its own entrance for people who had tested positive. Staff working there would not work in other parts of the home or in other care services, to reduce the risk of spreading infection.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Separate infection control area
The home had adapted part of the building as a designated setting, with a separate entrance to reduce the risk of cross infection.
“The provider had considered and adapted one part of the home to be used as a designated setting, with its own entrance to minimise the risk of cross infection.” from the report
Staffing arrangements
Staff working in the designated area would work only there. Systems also stopped staff working across other care services or other parts of the home.
“Staff would be deployed to work solely in part of the home, identified as a designated setting unit to reduce risks of cross infection to others.” from the report
Wide infection control checks
Inspectors were assured about the home’s arrangements for PPE, testing, safe admissions, visits, cleaning, social distancing and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Training and guidance
Systems were in place to keep staff training and guidance up to date for safe infection control practice.
“Systems were in place to ensure staff received up to date guidance and training to ensure those staff continued to meet government guidelines for safe infection control practices to reduce the risk of cross infection.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Is the designated setting still in use, and how is it kept separate from the rest of the home?
- 02Do staff working in the designated setting work only in that area and not in other care services?
- 03Were the planned increases in domestic staff hours put in place, and how often are shared areas cleaned and sanitised?
- 04How are staff kept up to date with infection prevention and control guidance?
- 05How are visits managed when there is an infection risk or outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control for the designated setting; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 January 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with recommendations about staff deployment and information storage.
This was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection. Two inspectors visited on 19 December 2017, spoke with people, a relative, staff and health professionals, and checked care records, medicines, training, recruitment, rotas and quality checks. The report also says the site visit took place on 18 December 2017.
The home was supporting 44 people, although it had space for up to 51. Inspectors found enough staff to meet care and safety needs. Staff understood people's risks, medicines were managed safely, care was adapted to people's wishes, and people had access to food, drinks and healthcare.
People were described as having kind relationships with staff. Inspectors found that people were supported to make choices, maintain their dignity and independence, and take part in activities they enjoyed. Care plans reflected people's histories, needs and preferences.
All five areas were rated Good, and the home remained Good since the previous inspection. Inspectors made recommendations about staff deployment so people had more opportunities to chat with staff, and about storing information more privately. The home said it would follow these recommendations, and acted immediately on the information-storage point.
Safe staffing and risk support
Staff understood people's individual safety risks and responded when help was needed. Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's safety needs.
“We saw there was enough staff to care for people so their safety needs were met.” from the report
Kind relationships
People knew and liked the staff supporting them. Staff took time to understand people's histories, preferred names and interests.
“We found staff knew the people they cared for well.” from the report
Personalised care
Care was planned around people's wishes, histories and changing needs. Staff also used advice from health and social care professionals.
“People's care plans and risk assessment reflected their histories, needs and preferences, and had been regularly reviewed.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday decisions, remain independent and receive care in the way they preferred.
“People told us they made their own day to day decisions about their care.” from the report
Storage of personal information
minorInspectors recommended changing how people's information was stored to strengthen privacy and confidentiality. Staff acted on this immediately.
“We made a recommendation about the way people's information was stored. This was acted on immediately by staff.” from the report
- 01How are staff deployed now at mealtimes and other busy periods so residents have time to chat?
- 02What changes were made to the way residents' information is stored, and how is confidentiality checked now?
- 03How will you assess and manage my relative's individual risks, such as falls, choking, pain or skin problems?
- 04How do you make sure care plans are updated when a resident's needs, preferences or health change?
- 05How do you support residents to choose activities, food, daily routines and the way their personal care is provided?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, although the report gives conflicting references to the site visit date of 18 and 19 December 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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 Welland House Care Centre
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- January 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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 Worcestershire
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 £1,260 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.