CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Westlands
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, visiting arrangements, protective equipment, testing and managing outbreaks. They also looked at staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection-control arrangements during this targeted visit.
The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to seven people with learning disabilities. Six people lived there when inspectors visited.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 8 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors found good practice. The home was clean and well maintained, staff used protective equipment properly, visitors were tested and the home had enough protective equipment available.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or new ratings for all five areas of care.
Activities and transport
People could use the home's minibus to go out regularly. Inspectors saw people being supported to visit a local restaurant.
“People therefore did not need to use public transport or taxis which reduced the risk of exposure to COVID-19 whilst still allowing them to undertake some of their usual activities.” from the report
Clean premises
The premises were clean and well maintained, with more frequent cleaning introduced during the pandemic.
“The premises were clean and well-maintained. Staff had increased the frequency of cleaning the premises at the start of the pandemic.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff used protective equipment correctly and there was a sufficient supply, including enhanced equipment for an outbreak.
“Staff used personal protective equipment (PPE) in line with current government guidance to protect people from the risk of infection.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors had to test negative, wear protective equipment and wash their hands before entering. Visits were arranged to reduce the risk of infection spreading.
“Visitors were required to undertake a rapid test for COVID-19 and return a negative result before entering.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the home's current overall CQC rating, and when was the last full inspection?
- 02What arrangements are now used for visitors and infection control?
- 03How does the home manage staffing pressures and make sure they do not affect people's care?
- 04How are people's activities and trips outside the home supported now?
- 05What were the ratings and findings for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led at the previous full inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 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, June 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care with effective management and no serious concerns.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 10 April 2018. One inspector visited the home, spoke with people, a relative, managers and care staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff records and quality checks.
The home supported up to seven people with learning disabilities, autism and some mobility needs. Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed properly, staffing levels were sufficient, and the home was clean. Staff had suitable training and supported people's health, choices and independence.
People were treated kindly and with respect. Care plans reflected people's needs, interests and goals. People had activities, accessible information and ways to complain. The home was well managed, with regular feedback and audits. All five areas were rated Good, continuing the rating from the previous inspection.
Safety and medicines
Risks were assessed and staff knew how to respond. Inspectors found secure medicines storage, accurate records and trained staff whose competence had been checked.
“MARs were accurate with no gaps and contained important information such as people's allergies and a photograph to confirm their identification.” from the report
Kind, respectful staff
Staff knew people's backgrounds and needs. They supported choice, independence, privacy and dignity during daily care.
“People were supported by kind and committed staff that knew them well.” from the report
Person-centred care
Care plans reflected people's preferences, needs and goals. Inspectors saw positive outcomes, including improved health and stamina for one person who stopped smoking.
“People's care was planned in a person-centred way and staff supported them to achieve goals.” from the report
Activities and communication
People had activities linked to their interests, including music, art, gardening and outings. Easy-read information helped people understand choices, rights and complaints.
“People had individual activity plans that involved outings and activities that reflected their interests.” from the report
Management and checks
The home sought views from people, relatives and staff. Audits covered areas such as health and safety, infection control and documentation, with action taken when needed.
“Staff carried out regular checks to assure the quality of the care that people received.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and update my relative's risk plans, especially if their mobility, anxiety or behaviour changes?
- 02How will you support my relative to make choices and build independence using accessible information?
- 03How will you meet my relative's dietary, healthcare and communication needs?
- 04What activities would match my relative's interests, and how often would they be supported to go out?
- 05How can my relative or our family give feedback or make a complaint, and how will we be told what action was taken?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the previous Good ratings continued. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 June 2018 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 Westlands
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2014GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.