CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Westbury Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found risk assessments, safeguarding procedures, safe recruitment and safe medicines systems. They also found enough staff to meet people's assessed needs.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people received appropriate food, healthcare and support with their choices. Inspectors found the home followed the Mental Capacity Act processes where needed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well, involved them in care decisions and allowed them to communicate at their own pace.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's histories, preferences and needs. Activities, religious services, communication support and family involvement were available.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable leadership, supportive staff relationships and effective quality checks. The home recorded incidents, shared learning and acted on issues found through audits.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Westbury Grange was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 30 September 2019. Two inspectors and an expert by experience spoke with six people, six relatives and staff. They also reviewed care plans, recruitment files, training records, policies and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, supported by enough trained staff, and given their medicines safely.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Their care plans reflected their preferences, activities were available, and families were involved in care planning. The home had systems to monitor quality and address problems.
The home was rated Good at the previous inspection, published on 13 April 2017, and remained Good overall.
Safe care and medicines
Risk assessments were regularly reviewed, staff knew how to report abuse, and medicines were stored and given safely.
“Medicines were stored securely, and medication administration records in use were accurate, and regularly checked for any mistakes.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw warm interactions. Staff took time with people and supported their dignity, privacy and independence.
“During our inspection, we observed staff treating people with dignity and respect, taking time to speak with people and allowing people to communicate at their own pace without feeling rushed.” from the report
Personalised activities and care
Care plans included personal histories and preferences. Activities were offered both in groups and individually.
“Care plans we looked at were personalised and contained information about people's personal and family history, and likes and dislikes.” from the report
Good leadership and oversight
The registered manager was seen as approachable and open. Management audits covered areas such as safety, maintenance and medicines, with improvements made when errors were found.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and meet my relative's particular care, dementia or nursing needs?
- 02How will you make sure my relative receives enough one-to-one support if they do not want to join group activities?
- 03How are medicines checked, especially medicines prescribed to be taken as and when required?
- 04How will my family be involved in reviewing and changing the care plan?
- 05How do you monitor staffing levels when people's needs change?
This was an unannounced inspection of the home’s premises and care, covering all five CQC key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 October 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.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the previous Good rating maintained.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 8 March 2017. Inspectors observed care, meals, medicines and activities. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People felt safe, medicines were managed correctly, and there were enough staff with suitable skills.
Inspectors found that staff treated people kindly, respected privacy and dignity, and involved people and relatives in care planning. People had choices about food and activities, and complaints had been handled properly.
The home was already rated Good at the inspection in March 2015. This inspection found that it remained Good. The report records no breaches, enforcement action or special measures.
Safety planning
People had individual assessments to help them stay safe while remaining as independent as possible. Staff reviewed these assessments and updated them when needed.
“People had individual risk assessments to enable them to be as independent as possible whilst keeping safe.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff with a suitable mix of skills. Recruitment checks, induction, training and supervision were in place.
“Rotas we viewed showed there was enough staff with varying skills on duty to provide the care and support people who used the serviced required.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness. Inspectors saw that privacy and dignity were respected during care.
“We saw people's privacy and dignity was kept at all times, for example being spoken to appropriately and when being assisted with meals or care.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's strengths, life histories, likes and dislikes. They were written for each individual and reviewed regularly.
“Care plans had been written in a personalised way for each individual and were reviewed regularly.” from the report
Food choices
People could choose their meals, and staff knew about specialist diets and fortified food. Drinks and snacks were available throughout the day.
“The chef knew who required a specialist diet and who needed their meals fortifying.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently make sure there are enough staff with the right skills on each shift?
- 02How are medicines checked and recorded now?
- 03How often are individual risk assessments and personalised care plans reviewed?
- 04What activities are currently available, and how are they matched to each person's interests?
- 05How are quality audits and action plans used to identify and fix problems?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in March 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 April 2017 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 Westbury Grange
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 December 2010.
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 Milton Keynes
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. 90 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.