CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Werrington Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, completed risk assessments and safe medicines practice. They also found systems for reporting accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training and support. People received help with food, drink and healthcare, and staff followed people's choices and best-interest decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed treating people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People were offered choices and supported to remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included people's individual needs and preferences. People had activities, family contact and support with complaints and end-of-life care.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was described as well managed. Audits, feedback, complaints and incident reviews were used to identify and make improvements.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements made since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection over three visits in January and February 2022. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers. They also observed care and checked records, medicines, staffing, infection control and how the home was managed.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training and support, kind interactions, personalised care plans and activities to help people stay connected.
The previous inspection, published in September 2019, rated the home Requires Improvement. The provider had been asked to improve. Inspectors found that the required improvements had been made and that the home was no longer breaching regulations.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were based on people's assessed needs and that care was provided in a timely way.
“There were sufficient staff to ensure that people were safe.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Records and stock checks matched, and staff who gave medicines had completed training and competency checks.
“The records and levels of stock tallied to show that people received their medication as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, privacy, choices and independence.
“Staff were calm, kind and gentle in their interactions with people and supported them to remain independent” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff information about people's health, personal care, eating and drinking, medicines and daily activities.
“People received personalised care responsive to their needs by staff who knew them well.” from the report
Improvements since the last inspection
The provider had acted on the previous action plan. The home was no longer in breach of the regulations identified at the earlier inspection.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.” from the report
Monitoring records
needs fixingInspectors said the manager was putting a system in place so monitoring charts were completed consistently. This suggests there was still a small area needing attention, although the overall Safe rating was Good.
“The registered manager was putting a system in place to ensure monitoring charts were always completed as expected so that any necessary action could be taken quickly.” from the report
- 01Which monitoring charts are being improved, and how do you check that they are completed every time?
- 02How will you assess whether staffing levels are enough for my relative's particular needs, including nursing or dementia care?
- 03How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing and agreeing the care plan?
- 04What activities and family contact will be available for my relative?
- 05How do you record and act on changes in weight, health, falls or other risks?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control, following the previous Requires Improvement inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 March 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, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about the home's infection prevention and control measures.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 21 December 2020. It was carried out because the CQC was reviewing infection prevention and control in care homes during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found that visitors were screened and tested, staff used protective equipment, and people and staff received regular testing. The home had also changed staffing, cleaning and layout arrangements to reduce the spread of infection.
The home was inspected but not rated overall, and the Safe question was also not rated. This report therefore gives information about infection prevention and control, not a full judgement on the quality of care.
Visitor safety checks
Visitors were restricted to essential visits and had a rapid test, temperature check, health questionnaire and protective equipment before entering.
“Visitors also had their temperature taken, completed a health questionnaire and wore full personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Staff protective equipment
Staff were trained to use protective equipment safely. People who had tested positive for COVID-19 were supported using barrier nursing.
“All staff had received training in the correct use of PPE, and how to take it off and put it on safely.” from the report
Reduced mixing
The home separated units, entrances and staff rotas to reduce contact between groups of staff and residents.
“Staff did not mix between units, and the units used different entrances and operated separate rotas.” from the report
Regular testing and cleaning
People and staff were tested regularly, and cleaning of frequently touched surfaces had increased.
“Whole home testing was carried out on both people and staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are visitors still limited to essential visits, and what checks and protective equipment are required before entry?
- 02How often are staff and residents tested now?
- 03Do staff still work within separate units and use separate entrances and rotas?
- 04How are people with an infection supported, and what protective equipment do staff use?
- 05How often are frequently touched surfaces and other areas cleaned?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the home was inspected but not rated overall or for the Safe question. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 January 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 Werrington Lodge
7 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015Inspected but not ratedEffective: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2014Inspected but not rated
- July 2014Inspected but not rated
- March 2014Inspected but not rated
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 February 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Peterborough
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 £1,370 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I honestly feel lucky to have found her and have already booked her for another visit.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.