CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wheatfield Drive
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and risks were assessed and reviewed. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines practice and good infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training suited to people's needs and people had access to health care. Inspectors found that the home had improved its use of the Mental Capacity Act and was making required safeguards applications.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect. Staff listened to people, supported their independence and respected their privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and support needs. People chose their activities, food and daily routines, and knew how to complain.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was involved in the home and understood its culture. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback, and audits were used to identify and track improvements.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with end-of-life planning still developing.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 28 and 29 August 2018. One inspector spoke with all three people living there, two support staff and managers. They also reviewed two care records and records about staffing, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training, clean surroundings and access to health care.
People were treated with kindness and respect. They were involved in choices about their food, activities, care and daily lives. The home had improved since the previous inspection, including making the required applications under the Mental Capacity Act when needed.
Safe care
Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and that staff knew how to report concerns.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse.” from the report
Choice and independence
People helped plan their meals and activities and were supported to do things for themselves, such as preparing drinks and food.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff listened to people, offered reassurance and respected their privacy and dignity.
“People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Each person had an individual care plan covering their preferences, abilities and support needs. People were involved in decisions about their care.
“People were in control of how their support was provided, and support was provided in a personalised way.” from the report
Open management
The manager was approachable and used feedback, audits and action plans to improve the home.
“The culture was transparent and honest, and staff told us they felt valued and proud to work for the organisation.” from the report
End-of-life planning
minorThe provider was only starting to discuss people's wishes for the end of their lives. Ask what progress has been made since this inspection.
“The registered provider was beginning to consider how they might support people at the end of their lives to have a dignified death.” from the report
- 01How do you now discuss and record each person's wishes for end-of-life care?
- 02How do you make sure medicines are given as prescribed and that any errors are followed up?
- 03How will you support my relative to make their own decisions and remain as independent as possible?
- 04How will you tell families promptly if their relative's needs or health change?
- 05How are agency staff introduced to the people living here and to their individual care plans?
This was an unannounced inspection of the whole care home, including care, accommodation, staffing, records and management, and all five ratings were assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 September 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.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but legal safeguards for people's liberty were not followed.
The inspection took place on 31 July 2017 and was announced. One inspector visited the home, spoke with people, relatives, staff and the manager, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines records, risk assessments, complaints records and audits.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, respectful relationships, personalised care and a good range of activities.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective. The main problem was that applications had not been made to legally authorise restrictions on people's liberty when required. Inspectors also found that epilepsy support plans and risk assessments were not always detailed enough.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. This was the first inspection of the home under its new registration.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, checked between shifts and recorded accurately. Inspectors found no unexplained gaps in medicine signatures.
“There were suitable arrangements in place for the safe storage, receipt and management of people's medicines.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff knew people well and interacted with them warmly and respectfully. People were supported to keep their dignity and independence.
“Staff were kind and caring: good interactions were seen throughout our inspection, such as staff sitting and talking with people as equals and treating them with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised activities
People had individual activity plans and could choose how to spend their time. Activities included college, swimming, hobbies, trips and community outings.
“There were a range of varied and meaningful activities that engaged people and gave people a sense of belonging in their community.” from the report
Visible leadership
The manager was regularly present, supported staff and used audits to monitor the home. Inspectors found an open and person-focused culture.
“The registered manager took an active role within the service and led by example.” from the report
Liberty safeguards
seriousThe home had not correctly assessed whether some people were being deprived of their liberty and had not made the required applications at the time of inspection. This was a breach of Regulation 11.
“The failure to follow the principles of the MCA 2005 is a breach of Regulation 11 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report
Epilepsy planning
needs fixingOne person with nocturnal epilepsy did not have a separate epilepsy care plan or risk assessment. The report says the home should review care planning for people with epilepsy.
“For example, one person with nocturnal epilepsy did not have an epilepsy care plan or a separate epilepsy risk assessment.” from the report
Accessible complaints forms
minorThere were no easy-read complaints forms for people to use. The manager agreed that these would be introduced immediately.
“We discussed with the registered manager that there were no easy read complaints forms for people to access and the registered manager agreed that this would be implemented immediately.” from the report
- 01Have all required DoLS applications been made, and what is the current legal position for my relative?
- 02How do you assess whether restrictions on someone's freedom are necessary and the least restrictive option?
- 03If my relative has epilepsy, what does their current care plan and risk assessment tell staff to do during and after a seizure?
- 04Have easy-read complaints forms been introduced, and how can my relative raise a concern independently?
- 05How do people and families help decide on care, activities and changes to the home?
This was an announced inspection of the overall quality of the home and all five CQC questions; it was the first inspection under the new registration. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 September 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 Wheatfield Drive
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2018Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 July 2016.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.