CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Wessex Lodge Nursing Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Wessex Lodge Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found improved safety and management, with some concerns about PPE and family communication.
Inspectors carried out an unannounced focused inspection on 1 December 2020. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, audits and other documents.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that fire safety actions had been completed, medicines were managed safely, staffing had improved, and new management and audit systems were in place. People said they felt safe.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured that some staff used personal protective equipment safely and effectively. Some relatives also wanted more detailed updates about their loved one's individual care. The previous overall rating was Requires Improvement, and the home had improved to Good at this inspection.
Fire safety improved
The home had completed all high-priority actions from the earlier fire risk assessment and commissioned a further assessment.
“The provider had completed all the high priority actions identified in the fire risk assessment dated 6 September 2019.” from the report
Safer staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely. The home had also significantly reduced its reliance on agency staff.
“There had been a significant reduction in the home's dependency on agency staff since our last inspection.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
There were suitable arrangements for storing and administering medicines, including medicines prescribed to be taken when needed.
“The provider had suitable processes in place to make sure people received their medicines safely and in line with good practice guidance.” from the report
Stronger management systems
The new management team had introduced clearer responsibilities, daily meetings and monthly audits to track risks and improvements.
“A system of monthly audits had been established since our last inspection.” from the report
Some PPE practice was not assured
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured that PPE was being used safely and effectively by all staff. They pointed the provider towards government guidance.
“Where we had concerns that some staff did not always wear the most appropriate PPE, we signposted the provider to recommendations in government guidance.” from the report
Family updates could be more personal
minorSome relatives felt that emails and other updates did not say enough about their own family member's care and support.
“Some family members felt that more could be done in the area of communications, and that the emails covered general updates and did not tell them enough about their loved one's individual care and support.” from the report
- 01How do you check that all staff use the most appropriate PPE safely and effectively?
- 02How will you provide families with updates about their relative's individual care, rather than only general information?
- 03How are the new monthly audits used to identify and follow up problems?
- 04How do you monitor staffing levels and the reduced use of agency staff?
- 05How will you keep the completed fire safety actions under review?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and effective care, but fire safety and management systems needed urgent improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 and 30 January 2020. Inspectors spoke with six residents, nine relatives and three staff members. They observed care and part of a medicines round, and checked care, medicines, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good for Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found care plans met people's needs, staff were kind and respectful, medicines were managed safely, and people could enjoy activities and outings.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Safe and Well-led. Fire risk assessment actions had not been completed promptly. Management checks had not led to improvements, staff supervision was not up to date, and most people had not been involved in care plan reviews.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection, published on 7 August 2017. The provider was in breach of Regulation 17 on good governance and was asked to send an action plan before a further inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as caring. Inspectors saw positive relationships and found that privacy, dignity and independence were promoted.
“There were caring relationships between people and staff.” from the report
Effective care planning
Care and support were based on detailed assessments and plans covering people's physical, mental and social needs.
“People's care and support was effective and based on detailed assessments and care plans which reflected their physical, mental and social needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records were accurate and up to date. Medicines were stored securely and given by trained registered nurses.
“Medicines records were accurate, complete and up to date.” from the report
Activities and social contact
People could take part in activities inside the home and in the community, including outings, arts and crafts, bingo and exercises.
“The service supported people to take part in a variety of activities both inside the home and in the community.” from the report
Fire safety actions incomplete
seriousHigh-priority actions from a fire risk assessment had not been completed within the recommended time. Chemicals were stored unsuitably and equipment obstructed corridors and a fire escape route.
“Failure to respond promptly to findings in a fire risk assessment put people at increased risk if there should be a fire.” from the report
Weak management follow-through
seriousAudits identified improvements, but actions were not always completed. This included improvements to care plans and the home's condition.
“The provider had continued to carry out quality audits and checks, but actions arising from audits had not always been followed up.” from the report
Limited involvement in care reviews
needs fixingMost people had not been supported to take part in reviews of their care plans. Most people were also not aware of their care plan or its contents.
“However, most people were not aware of their care plan or what it contained.” from the report
Staff feedback and supervision
needs fixingFormal supervision meetings with staff were not up to date. Residents' meetings and opportunities to give feedback had also not happened recently.
“There had been no formal two-way exchange of information with staff.” from the report
- 01Have all the high-priority actions from the September 2019 fire risk assessment now been completed?
- 02How are corridors and fire escape routes checked to make sure equipment is not stored in them?
- 03How are audits and identified improvements now tracked until they are completed?
- 04How are residents and relatives being involved in care plan reviews?
- 05How often are staff supervision meetings and residents' or relatives' meetings now held?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 April 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 Wessex Lodge Nursing Home
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.