CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Weybourne
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
The inspection took place on 26 October 2020 and was announced. It was part of a CQC thematic review of infection prevention and control in care homes.
Inspectors found good practice. Staff were trained to use personal protective equipment, checks were made on every shift, and the home had regular coronavirus testing and extra cleaning.
New or returning residents were isolated for 14 days. The home limited visits to window visits and video calls at the time, while making plans for safer indoor visits.
The home was inspected but not rated. The inspection only looked at infection prevention and control, so it does not give an overall judgement on the quality of care.
PPE checks and training
Staff had training in the correct use of PPE. Senior care staff checked PPE three times a day.
“Senior care staff undertook a 'PPE audit' on each shift (three times per day), to ensure any concerns about PPE were addressed as they arose.” from the report
Testing and reducing staff movement
Residents and staff took part in regular coronavirus testing. The provider also reduced staff movement between services.
“Staff, managers and people who use the service benefitted from participating in a regular regime of testing for coronavirus.” from the report
Safe admissions
People moving into the home or returning from hospital were isolated for 14 days to reduce infection risks.
“People moving into the service, or returning from a stay in hospital or elsewhere, were isolated for 14 days to reduce the risk of infection transmission.” from the report
Cleaning and the environment
The home had added a cleaning shift and increased surface and deep cleaning. Inspectors found it very clean.
“In response to the increased risk of infection, the registered manager had introduced an additional cleaning shift each day to ensure more frequent surface cleaning and more regular deep cleaning of all areas within the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control measures are currently in place, and how do they compare with those seen by inspectors in October 2020?
- 02How are new residents and people returning from hospital supported during any isolation period?
- 03What are the current visiting arrangements, including testing or other requirements for regular visitors?
- 04How often are PPE checks and cleaning checks carried out now?
- 05What is the home's current overall CQC rating for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care?
This was an announced thematic review focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other quality areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 November 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, May 2018
Weybourne was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care across all five areas.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 13 March 2018. One inspector and one expert by experience spoke with people living at the home, relatives, a visitor and staff. They also reviewed care records, staff files, medicines, accidents, training and quality checks.
Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed properly and there were enough staff. Staff had suitable training and understood how to support people who may lack capacity to make some decisions. People received support with food, drink and healthcare.
People described staff as kind and respectful. Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences, activities were available, and complaints were handled appropriately. The home had recently been refurbished, although its activities coordinator had left and a replacement was being recruited.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection in August 2016, and inspectors said it continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were administered by trained staff, recorded correctly and stored at suitable temperatures. Inspectors found no gaps in the medicines records they checked.
“Medicines were safely administered by trained staff using a monitored dosage system supplied by a local pharmacist and recorded appropriately.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were patient and friendly, respected privacy and dignity, and encouraged people to remain as independent as possible.
“Staff supported people at their own pace and engaged positively with them in conversations that were relaxed and friendly.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans covered people's health, communication, mobility, nutrition, preferences and what could cause anxiety or distress. They were reviewed regularly.
“People's care plans were person centred and addressed a range of needs such as the support people required with medicines, communication, mobility, skin integrity, moving and handling, nutrition and personal care.” from the report
Good monitoring
The home carried out regular checks covering areas such as care plans, medicines, infection control, complaints and kitchen safety. Inspectors found no issues in the sample of audits reviewed.
“The home had effective systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the home.” from the report
Activities coordinator vacancy
minorThe activities coordinator had recently left and the home was recruiting a replacement. Staff were providing daily activities in the meantime, but families may want to check how this is being maintained.
“The home's activities co-ordinator had recently left. At the time of our inspection the home was in the process of recruiting one.” from the report
- 01Who is currently responsible for activities while the activities coordinator vacancy is being filled?
- 02What activities are available each day for people with different interests and abilities?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's care plan reflects their preferences and is reviewed when their needs change?
- 04How are medicines checked and how would you tell the family if there was a medicines error?
- 05How can relatives give feedback or make a complaint, and how will the outcome be shared?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and covered all five CQC questions, with ratings given for each. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 May 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 Weybourne
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Greenwich
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. 87 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
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.