CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Westholme
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were managed, staffing was sufficient, recruitment checks were completed and medicines were administered safely. There had been no accidents since the previous inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received suitable training and support, enjoyed a choice of food and drinks, and were helped to access healthcare. The home worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were patient, respectful and gentle with people. They supported people to make choices, maintain privacy and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed, personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported with communication, family contact, activities, community access and end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The manager was approachable and had introduced an electronic quality monitoring system. However, the current manager had not submitted their application to become registered with CQC after the previous manager de-registered.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good overall, but well-led Requires Improvement because no manager was registered with CQC.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days. The inspector spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. People were described as comfortable, and the atmosphere was calm and relaxed. Staff supported people with choice, independence, activities, healthcare and contact with relatives.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The previous manager had left the CQC register, and the current manager had started but not submitted their registration application. The home’s décor was also tired and needed refurbishment.
The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in June 2017. CQC said it would continue to monitor the home and could inspect sooner if concerns arose.
Safe care
Inspectors found that personal risks, building risks and medicines were managed safely. There had been no accidents since the last inspection.
“Medicines administration was safe. Staff knew the purposes of 'when required' medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well, treated them with patience and respect, and involved them in choices.
“Staff treated people well and with respect. Staff spoke to people in gentle tones and were patient with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people’s preferences and needs. Staff reviewed them and discussed people’s goals regularly.
“Care plans were detailed and person-centred. They described how people liked to be supported and to ensure their needs were appropriately met.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, take part in daily tasks, access activities and use community facilities.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Manager not yet registered
needs fixingThe previous manager de-registered in August 2019. The current manager had started the registration process but had not submitted the application, which caused the well-led rating to fall.
“The current manager had started the registration process but had yet to submit their application to CQC.” from the report
Tired décor
minorThe home needed refurbishment. The provider said improvements would be made, but the report does not give a timescale.
“The décor of the home was tired and in need of some refurbishment.” from the report
- 01Has the current manager now submitted and completed their CQC registration application?
- 02What refurbishment has been completed since the inspection, and what work is still planned?
- 03How are people and their relatives involved in reviewing care plans and setting monthly goals?
- 04How does the home check that medicines, risk assessments and staff training remain up to date?
- 05What activities, work and community access would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 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.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Westholme was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, and the home remained Good since 2015.
This was an unannounced inspection on 21 and 24 April 2017. One inspector spoke with six people living at the home, staff and the manager. They observed care, meals and daily activities, checked the building, and reviewed care, staff and management records.
The home supported up to eight people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable recruitment checks and appropriate safeguarding arrangements. The home was clean, repairs were dealt with quickly and people had access to health professionals.
People were treated with dignity and respect. They were supported to make choices, stay independent, take part in activities, keep relationships and use community services. Staff knew people's needs and preferences well.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home met the fundamental standards inspected against and remained Good after the previous inspection in April 2015.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity, compassion and respect. Inspectors saw warm, friendly interactions and staff who knew people very well.
“We observed positive interactions between staff and people who lived at the service.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment included identity checks, references and background checks.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the present needs of people using the service.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to keep active and follow their own interests. Activities were planned around individual needs and wishes.
“Activities were personalised for each individual.” from the report
Good health support
People were supported to attend health checks, appointments and specialist services when needed.
“This meant people who used the service had access to healthcare services and received on-going healthcare support.” from the report
Regular checks and improvement
The home used audits and management checks to monitor safety, medicines, equipment and people's needs. Action was taken when issues were found.
“We saw records which showed where action was taken following any issues identified through this process.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you support my relative's personal routines, choices and independence?
- 02How will you make sure there are enough permanent staff to support people if staff are absent?
- 03How are medicines audits completed, including medicines prescribed 'as and when required'?
- 04How often will my relative's care plan and views be reviewed, and how will changes be recorded?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC questions, including observations, discussions and reviews of care, staff and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 June 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 Westholme
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 April 2014.
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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.