CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Whitegates & The Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable safeguarding systems, enough staff, safe medicines management, infection controls and processes for reviewing accidents and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive leadership, supportive relationships, clear policies, regular audits and evidence that the home learned from incidents and worked with outside professionals.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Whitegates & The Cottage is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some families wanting more contact during the pandemic.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 10 and 21 May 2021. It followed safeguarding concerns, but inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from those concerns.
Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing levels were enough, medicines were managed safely, infection controls were in place, and accidents and incidents were reviewed. The home supported people to make choices, take positive risks and remain as independent as possible.
The home was also judged well-led. Staff, relatives and managers described a positive culture and good teamwork. Some relatives wanted more contact during the pandemic, but inspectors found systems for communication, quality checks and learning from incidents.
The overall rating was Good. Safe and well-led were inspected and both were rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected at this visit, so their previous ratings were used in the overall rating.
Person-centred support
Staff supported people to make choices, stay independent and take positive risks. Care was described as respecting dignity and privacy.
“Care was person-centred and promoted people's choice, independence, dignity and privacy.” from the report
Staffing and continuity
Inspectors saw enough staff who were responsive and unhurried. Staff knew people's needs and risks, helping the home maintain continuity of care.
“We observed sufficient staffing levels throughout the inspection and staff appeared unhurried and responsive to people.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicine records checked by inspectors accurately reflected what had been given. Staff were trained and their competence was checked regularly.
“Medicines were administered safely by staff who knew people well.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits, meetings and reviews to identify improvements and share learning. It also worked with outside professionals to support people's needs.
“The provider had quality assurance procedures to help drive ongoing improvements within the service.” from the report
Family contact
minorSome relatives wanted more contact during the pandemic. One relative said calls were not always convenient for speaking to an appropriate member of staff.
“Some relatives told us that during the pandemic they would have liked increased contact from the provider.” from the report
- 01How will you keep our family updated, and who can we speak to when we have concerns or questions?
- 02How do you support people to take positive risks while keeping their care plans and risk assessments up to date?
- 03How often do you use agency staff, and how do you make sure they know each person's needs?
- 04How are medicines audits and staff competence checks carried out?
- 05How can relatives contribute ideas about care plans, activities, the building and the grounds?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only, prompted partly by safeguarding concerns; the other ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 August 2021 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a previous reporting failure now corrected.
Inspectors visited on 16 and 21 August 2018. The inspection was announced. They observed care and mealtimes, spoke with people involved in the home, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files, training, risk assessments and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, detailed risk assessments and clean surroundings. People were supported with their health, nutrition, communication, independence and personal choices.
Staff were described as kind and respectful. Care plans were personalised and written with people and their families. People were supported to make choices, express themselves, take part in activities and achieve their goals.
At the previous inspection, the service had failed to tell CQC about some injuries and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications. This was a breach then, but inspectors found the required notifications were being made at this inspection.
Detailed risk planning
Risk assessments gave staff clear instructions about individual risks, including choking, epilepsy, nutrition and allergies.
“Risk assessments were individualised and provided staff with clear, precise guidance on managing these risks.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's communication needs, interests, relationships, preferences and abilities. They were reviewed regularly with people and families.
“Care plans were written in partnership with people and their families, were regularly reviewed and accurately reflected the care and support people needed.” from the report
Strong quality checks
The home used audits, action plans and regular reviews to monitor safety and improve care.
“There were robust systems to monitor quality and safety within the service.” from the report
Previous notification failure
seriousAt the previous inspection, the home had not told CQC about some injuries and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards application outcomes. Inspectors found this had been corrected by the current inspection.
“This amounted to breaches of Regulation 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Registration) Regulations 2009.” from the report
- 01How are medicines checked now, and how are staff's competency assessments kept up to date?
- 02How are individual risks, such as choking, epilepsy, allergies and nutrition, reviewed when people's needs change?
- 03How will my relative and our family be involved in writing and reviewing the care plan?
- 04How are people supported to communicate, make choices and build independence?
- 05How are injuries, incidents and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications reported to CQC now?
This was an announced inspection of the overall service covering all five key questions and the service's legal requirements. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 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.
Every inspection of Whitegates & The Cottage
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 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.