CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Whitefield House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Whitefield House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with one medicines stock-recording error.
The inspection was unannounced on 18 and 20 April 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, visitors, staff and a health professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staffing, training, recruitment, the building and quality checks.
The inspectors found that people were safe, received their medicines as prescribed and had enough staff to meet their needs. Staff were trained and supported. People’s choices and rights were respected, and their health, food and drink needs were monitored.
The home was described as friendly, homely and easy-going. Care records were detailed and personal. People enjoyed activities and were involved in decisions about the home. All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Improvements identified at the previous inspection in medicines management and quality checks had been made.
Safe medicines care
Inspectors found that medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely overall. Staff had training and regular checks of their competence.
“Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind atmosphere
Staff knew people well and treated them with patience, empathy and respect. Inspectors saw relaxed interactions and a friendly atmosphere.
“We found the atmosphere in the home was friendly, homely and easy-going.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records reflected people’s routines, wishes, interests and abilities. They gave staff clear information about how to provide support.
“Care records were detailed and person centred.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in activities at the home and in the wider community. Inspectors found that the home worked to reduce social isolation.
“People enjoyed the activities on offer at the home and in the wider community.” from the report
Strong oversight
Managers carried out regular checks and audits, including unannounced visits at night and at weekends. People’s views were collected through meetings, surveys and individual conversations.
“There was a robust system of quality assurance in place.” from the report
Medicine stock records
needs fixingTwo stock balances for as-required medicines were incorrect because of a recording error from the previous month. Inspectors confirmed the medicines had been given as needed, and the manager had introduced measures to improve the recording.
“Two stock balances of 'as required' medicines were not correct.” from the report
- 01How are stock balances for as-required medicines checked now, and how are recording errors followed up?
- 02What refurbishment work has been completed since the inspection, and what work remains?
- 03How are care plans reviewed when a person’s needs, wishes or health change?
- 04Which activities and community outings are currently available, and how are people supported to choose them?
- 05How are families told about complaints, concerns and the action taken in response?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and covered all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
What inspectors found, November 2016
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, responsive care, but recruitment, medicines records and quality checks needed improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 5 October 2016. They spoke with people living in the home, a relative, staff and a health professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
People were generally treated kindly and respectfully. There were enough staff, care plans usually gave staff the information they needed, and people received training, food and healthcare support. Activities were available and people could give feedback or complain.
The home was not always safe or well-led. Recruitment checks did not fully protect people from unsuitable staff. One medicine was left unattended, records for covert medicines were incomplete, and some medicines records had missing signatures. Quality checks did not clearly show what action had been taken or followed up.
The overall rating means the home was not consistently meeting the standards inspectors checked, although three areas were rated Good. The previous inspection in September 2013 found it was meeting all the regulations reviewed at that time.
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind and respectful. Inspectors saw warm interactions and staff taking steps to protect privacy and dignity.
“People who lived in Whitefield House told us staff were always kind, caring and respectful of their dignity and privacy.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were consistent and people said staff responded to their needs promptly, including at night.
“People who used the service told us there were always enough staff available to meet their needs in a timely manner.” from the report
Trained staff
Staff had completed relevant training and received induction, supervision and appraisals. They said they felt confident in their roles.
“Records we reviewed showed that staff employed in the service had received training to help ensure they were able to safely care for and support people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's preferences, routines and interests. Staff knew people's needs and encouraged independence where possible.
“Care records we reviewed contained information about people's likes and dislikes as well as recording important social relationships, interests and preferred daily routines.” from the report
Activities and feedback
The home offered activities such as crafts, baking and movie nights. People could comment on meals, activities and the running of the home.
“We saw that there was a regular programme of activities available to people who lived at Whitefield House.” from the report
Recruitment checks
seriousThe recruitment procedure did not require extra checks about why applicants had left previous work with vulnerable adults or children. This could increase the risk of unsuitable staff being employed.
“Recruitment systems needed to be improved to help ensure people were protected from the risk of unsuitable staff.” from the report
Quality monitoring
needs fixingAudits were carried out, but records did not clearly show what actions were needed or whether improvements had been checked. Incident trends were not formally analysed.
“Although a number of audits took place, including those in relation to medication, care plans and the environment, there was no robust plan for when the audits should take place.” from the report
Recording responses to concerns
needs fixingThe home said it had investigated a concern raised in a satisfaction survey, but this was not recorded. Inspectors said concerns and actions should be documented and shared where appropriate.
“We could not see from the records we reviewed what action had been taken in response to the concerns raised.” from the report
- 01What additional recruitment checks are now completed for applicants who have worked with vulnerable adults or children?
- 02How do you record covert medicines, including what staff should do if a person refuses them?
- 03What safeguards are in place to make sure medicines are never left unattended?
- 04How are audit actions recorded, given deadlines and checked as completed?
- 05How do you record and share the outcome of complaints and concerns raised by relatives or residents?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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 Whitefield House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2018Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 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 Bury
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. 94 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.