CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Westcliff Lodge Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Westcliff Lodge Limited: inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and visiting arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 1 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
The home had checks for visitors, including questionnaires, temperature checks, protective equipment and rapid testing. People were admitted safely after their COVID-19 status was checked and they self-isolated in line with guidance.
Inspectors found that staff generally used protective equipment and followed good hygiene practices. Cleaning schedules were being followed, and the home was visibly clean and free from odours.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not provide a new overall rating or a full set of ratings for the five areas of care.
Safe visiting
The home used a booking system and followed government guidance for visits. Visitors were screened and required to use protective measures and rapid testing.
“Suitable measures were in place to screen all visitors and this included completion of a questionnaire, temperature checks, the wearing of Personal Protective Equipment [PPE] and rapid flow testing” from the report
Safe admissions
People's COVID-19 status was checked before they were admitted. New residents self-isolated in line with the guidance in force at the time.
“People were admitted into the service safely. People's COVID-19 status was sought prior to admittance and people self-isolated in line with current government guidance.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff were observed using masks, gloves and aprons, alongside good hygiene practices. Most staff had received relevant infection control and COVID-19 training.
“Appropriate infection prevention control practices were observed for staff, such as the wearing of masks, gloves, aprons and included good hygiene practices.” from the report
Clean environment
Cleaning schedules were in place and being followed. Inspectors found the environment visibly clean and without unpleasant smells.
“Cleaning schedules were in place and being followed. The environment was visibly clean and odour free.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What visiting arrangements, screening and testing are in place now?
- 02How are new residents' infection risks assessed and managed when they move in?
- 03How does the home cover staff shortages now, and could extra shifts affect continuity of care?
- 04What training have all staff completed on infection prevention and the correct use of protective equipment?
- 05What is the home's latest full inspection rating, given that this inspection was not rated?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it did not provide a full set of care ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 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, July 2019
Westcliff Lodge Limited was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and enough staff, but weaknesses in risk checks, medicines, care records and management oversight.
Inspectors visited without notice on 26 and 29 March 2019. They observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and the manager, and checked care files, medicines, recruitment, training, staffing and complaints records.
People generally said they felt safe and received kind, respectful care. There were enough staff, the home was clean, people could access food and healthcare, and staff supported people's choices.
However, some safety risks had not been dealt with quickly enough. Medicines records and administration were not always correct. Two people did not have care plans, social activities were limited, and quality checks had not found these problems.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Effective and Caring were rated Good. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. This was the second consecutive inspection with an overall Requires Improvement rating.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives were positive about the care. Staff knew people well, respected privacy and dignity, and encouraged independence.
“People were supported and cared for by a consistent team of staff.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs promptly. Call alarms were answered in good time.
“There were enough staff to meet people's care and support needs in a timely manner.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People spoke positively about meals and could choose where to eat. Healthcare support was available when needed, and relatives were kept informed.
“People had access to food and drink throughout the day and the overall dining experience for people was positive.” from the report
Manager's response to feedback
The new manager was open to the inspection findings and had begun an action plan, including rewriting care plans and risk assessments.
“The newly appointed manager was passionate and committed to make the required improvements.” from the report
Risks and fire safety
seriousSome fire door improvements were still incomplete, personal emergency evacuation plans were missing, and not all risk assessments had been reviewed. This meant there was limited assurance about people's safety.
“The registered provider did not ensure all risks for people were mitigated for their safety and wellbeing.” from the report
Medicines
seriousThree people's medicine records had gaps, two medicines were not given as prescribed, and some as-needed medicine instructions were incomplete.
“Two people's medicine was not given in line with the prescriber's instructions.” from the report
Care plans
needs fixingCare records did not always explain people's needs or preferences accurately. Two people had no care plan describing the care staff should provide.
“Two people did not have a care plan in place detailing their care and support needs and the delivery of care to be provided by staff.” from the report
Provider oversight
seriousThe provider's checks had not identified several problems with safety, medicines, care planning and social care. Inspectors found that action had not been taken soon enough.
“This demonstrated a lack of oversight by the registered provider to effectively monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service for people living at Westcliff Lodge.” from the report
- 01Have all personal emergency evacuation plans now been completed for residents who may need them?
- 02How are medicines checked now, including missed signatures, medicines given as prescribed and instructions for as-needed medicines?
- 03Do all residents now have care plans that accurately describe their needs, preferences and wishes?
- 04What regular activities and community opportunities are available for each resident, based on their interests?
- 05How does the provider now check that risks, care plans, medicines and complaints are identified and acted on promptly?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care home, covering both the premises and the care provided, and assessing all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 July 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.
Every inspection of Westcliff Lodge Limited
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 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
51 live-in carers within about an hour of Southend-on-Sea
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 £960 to £1,200 a week. 44 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
“She was always cheerful and looking for ways to stimulate my mother. She became her "friend" and provided best care always.”
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.