CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Westside Home 2
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. The home had risk assessments, safeguarding arrangements, building safety checks, safe recruitment and enough staff. Medicines were given at the right time, although the medicines-checking procedure needed review.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's health and social care needs were assessed and monitored. Staff were trained, people were supported to access healthcare, and inspectors found that consent was obtained before care was provided.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as caring and kind. Inspectors saw respectful, supportive conversations, and people were involved in decisions about their care and supported to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. People could choose activities, receive information in accessible formats and use the complaints procedure if they were unhappy.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff said the home was approachable, friendly and well managed. Audits, meetings, questionnaires and partnership work were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a medicines-checking procedure to review.
This was an unannounced inspection on 4 April 2019. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with three people, two care staff and the registered manager. They reviewed care and medicines records, staff recruitment files, and checks on how the home was run.
The five people living in the home said they felt safe and well looked after. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable training, support with physical and mental health, respectful care and activities based on people's choices. They also found effective checks and audits.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found that legal requirements were met and that people received consistently good care. The home was also rated Good at its previous inspection, published on 1 November 2016.
People felt safe
People said staff kept them safe, and inspectors found clear risk assessments, safeguarding systems and enough staff on duty.
“People told us they felt safe and well looked after in the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff took time to talk with people and respected their privacy, dignity, equality and personal backgrounds.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans were written from the person's perspective. People had choices about activities, food, routines and how they used the home.
“People took part in a range of group and one-to-one activities depending on their preferences.” from the report
Good oversight
The home used audits, meetings and feedback to check the quality of care and identify improvements.
“Quality assurance audits were effective and improvements to the quality of the service were made if shortfalls had been identified.” from the report
Medicines procedure needed review
minorMedicines were being given safely, but inspectors asked the manager to review the monthly checking procedure after the dispensing pharmacist changed how medicines were supplied.
“We saw that medicines were checked monthly, but we spoke with the registered manager about reviewing this procedure in response to the changes made by the dispensing pharmacist” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to the medicines-checking procedure since the dispensing pharmacist stopped using a monitored dosage system?
- 02How do you check that people receive their medicines safely and at the right time?
- 03What specialised training has been arranged for staff to support the more diverse group of people now using the home?
- 04How are people's choices about activities, routines and staying out after the 10:00pm curfew recorded and reviewed?
- 05How do people raise concerns, and what has changed as a result of recent community meetings or questionnaires?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including three people's care and medicines records, three staff files and records about how the home was managed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 April 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, November 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
The inspection was announced and took place on 29 September 2016. One inspector visited the home, spoke with four people, two staff members and the registered manager, and reviewed care records, staffing records, medicines records and management records.
People said they felt safe and well cared for. Inspectors found suitable staffing levels, safe medicines systems, trained staff and support for people's health needs. Staff were seen treating people calmly, respectfully and with kindness.
People had individual care plans and were supported to make choices, use local services, attend college and take part in activities. The home had meetings, surveys and checks to gather views and monitor the quality of care.
The home was rated Good in each of the five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection in October 2014 also rated the service Good, with all standards inspected met.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. The rota showed two staff during the day and one at night, with changes made when extra support was needed.
“Sufficient staff were on duty to meet the needs of people.” from the report
Respectful care
People said staff respected their wishes and dignity. Inspectors saw staff speak privately with people about personal matters.
“People told us that staff respected their wishes and maintained their dignity.” from the report
Personalised support
Each person had a care plan describing their support needs and how these should be met. People signed their plans to show agreement.
“Each person had their own individual care plan that identified their support needs and how these needs were to be met.” from the report
Support for independence
People were supported to use local shops, colleges, public transport and other community services. The home also supported personal goals such as developing cooking skills and moving to more independent accommodation.
“People told us that they accessed the local community independently on a daily basis.” from the report
Quality checks
The home carried out checks on medicines, the environment, care plans and fire detection. People and staff were also asked for their views.
“Quality assurance systems were in place to ensure that the service was safe and that people received the care and support they needed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you decide when the rota needs to be changed to provide extra staff for appointments or activities?
- 02How are people's 'when required' medicines reviewed, and how do you make sure the protocols remain suitable?
- 03How are people's care plans and daily records updated when their needs or wishes change?
- 04What activities, college courses and community opportunities are available now, and how are people supported to choose them?
- 05How are people's views from residents' meetings and surveys turned into changes at the home?
This was an announced inspection covering the overall quality of the home and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 November 2016 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 Westside Home 2
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Harrow
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 £1,330 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
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.