CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Westview House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely, staffing levels were sufficient and recruitment checks were completed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received suitable care, training and healthcare support. Staff followed guidance about nutrition, swallowing and other health needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, patient and respectful. People and families were involved in care decisions, and staff supported privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and were reviewed when needs changed. People were offered a wide range of activities, although end of life plans were not detailed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider and management team monitored quality and supported staff. However, the manager was not yet registered with CQC and new systems still needed to become embedded.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Westview House was rated Good overall, with kind, personalised care and no major safety concerns, but its leadership rating fell from Outstanding.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 2 and 6 August 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training and clean, safe surroundings. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
Care was personalised and based on people's wishes. People were supported with activities, healthcare, food and communication. Inspectors noted that end of life plans were not yet detailed, and that new management systems still needed to become consistent.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as caring and compassionate. Inspectors observed staff treating people with patience, dignity and respect.
“People and their relatives told us they were happy with the care provided and staff were caring and compassionate.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences and support needs. Staff knew people well and adapted their approach to individual wishes.
“Staff demonstrated a commitment to providing person-centred care based on people's preferences and wishes.” from the report
Safe care
Risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
“Risks to people were assessed and minimised and people were protected from the risk of abuse.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in activities at home and in the community. These included music, crafts, gardening, trips out and social events.
“People were supported to engage in a variety of activities of their choice.” from the report
Management systems still bedding in
needs fixingNew systems and practices had been introduced, but inspectors said they needed to become established so that the home used a consistent approach.
“New systems and practices had been implemented, however these needed to be imbedded into the service to ensure a consistent approach was maintained.” from the report
End of life plans lacked detail
needs fixingBasic end of life wishes were recorded, but the plans were not detailed. Referrals had been made to a hospice to help develop fuller plans.
“People's basic end of life wishes had been captured in their care plans. However, these were not detailed.” from the report
- 01Has the manager now been registered with CQC, and who is responsible for the home until registration is complete?
- 02What changes have been made to ensure the new management systems are now used consistently?
- 03How are each person's end of life wishes recorded, reviewed and shared with families and healthcare professionals?
- 04How will you support my relative's particular communication needs, preferences and cognitive impairment?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be suitable for my relative?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care home, including the premises and care provided; the registered home care service had no users at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 August 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, February 2017
Westview House rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with Outstanding leadership.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 04 and 08 November 2016. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, visitors, staff and health and care professionals. They also observed care and checked care plans, staff records, medicines records, complaints and quality checks.
Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements and suitable checks on staff before employment. People’s risks were assessed and care plans explained how staff should support them safely while encouraging independence. Staff were trained and understood how to protect people from abuse.
People were treated with dignity and respect. Care was shaped around each person’s history, choices, communication needs and interests. Inspectors also found good support with food, drink, healthcare, activities and keeping in touch with family and friends.
The overall rating was Good. The five main areas were each rated Good, while leadership was rated Outstanding. This means the inspectors found a consistently good service overall, with particularly strong management, organisation and improvement systems.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were observed speaking warmly and patiently with people. They respected privacy, choices and decisions about care and activities.
“People were treated with dignity and respect at all times.” from the report
Strong leadership
The management team was approachable and organised. Staff, families and professionals were involved in developing the service, and the provider acted on feedback and new ideas.
“There was an open and transparent culture within the home and 'the hub'; and staff worked effectively with people, relatives, and other professionals.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people’s needs and saw safe arrangements for storing, administering and recording medicines.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs and to enable them to engage with people in a relaxed and unhurried manner.” from the report
Useful activities
Activities were based on people’s interests, abilities and life histories. There was a mixture of group and individual activities, with support for people who could not take part independently.
“People's lives were enriched through the work of the VITAL coordinator who provided excellent support to people living at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and record my relative’s risks, and how would you support their independence while keeping them safe?
- 02How would you involve me and my relative in creating and reviewing the care plan?
- 03What activities would be suitable for my relative’s interests, abilities and communication needs?
- 04How are medicines checked, and how would you respond if my relative refused or had difficulty taking them?
- 05If my relative used the hub service in the community, how would staff keep them safe and share information with the home and other professionals?
This inspection covered the residential home and the community support service known as the hub, using discussions, observations and checks of six people’s care records; the previous inspection in January 2014 found no issues. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 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 Westview House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 November 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
84 live-in carers within about two hours of Isle of Wight
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 £1,010 to £1,230 a week. 68 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.