CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Whitehaven
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicine management and a clean home.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported. People received help with food, drink, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, compassion, privacy and respect. People were involved in decisions and encouraged to be independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and people had choice and control. Staff supported communication, activities and contact with family and friends.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was visible and involved. Audits identified shortfalls and action plans were used to improve the service.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the home was larger than current best practice guidance suggests.
This was an unannounced inspection on 1 and 2 August 2019. One inspector spoke with nine people, two relatives, four staff members and a visiting professional. They also reviewed care, medicine, staffing, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe, well cared for and listened to. Staff supported people with their health, communication, choices, relationships and activities.
The home supported 11 people with learning disabilities. It was larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service. Inspectors said the building design and arrangements reduced the effect of its size. The overall rating remained Good, as it had been at the previous inspection published in December 2016.
Safe care and medicines
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff managed medicines safely, had safeguarding training and used risk assessments to reduce potential harm.
“People received their medicines when they needed them, and the service was clean and tidy.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw warm interactions. Staff knew people well and respected their privacy, dignity, choices and independence.
“We observed caring interactions and kind support from staff that knew people well.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's preferences and daily support. People could choose how to spend their time and take part in activities they enjoyed.
“People received a personalised care service that was tailored to their needs.” from the report
Active management
The manager was visible and involved in the home. Quality checks found shortfalls and action plans were used to put them right.
“Quality audits had been effective in identifying shortfalls and putting them right through action plans.” from the report
Larger than best practice guidance
minorThe home supported 11 people in a building inspectors described as larger than most domestic homes. Inspectors said its design and layout reduced the negative effect, but it had not been developed in line with the principles of Registering the Right Support.
“The service had not been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01How does the home make sure its larger size does not reduce people's choice, independence or community life?
- 02How are each person's communication needs recorded, and how do staff make sure they understand the person's choices?
- 03How many staff are usually on duty, and how are one-to-one support hours arranged?
- 04How are people involved in reviewing their care plans and making decisions about daily life?
- 05What shortfalls have recent audits identified, and what action was taken to put them right?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, including both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 September 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, March 2017
Whitehaven rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with improvements in privacy and dignity.
This was an unannounced routine inspection on 21 February 2017. The inspectors observed care, reviewed care plans, risk assessments, incident records, medicines records and management checks. They spoke with people living at the home, staff, managers, social work professionals and relatives.
The home supported up to 14 adults with learning disabilities and mental health conditions. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, trained staff and appropriate risk assessments. People had access to healthcare, food choices and activities.
Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness and respect. Care plans described people's needs, preferences and communication. The home had good systems for checking quality and acting on feedback. All five areas were rated Good.
The caring rating had been Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in December 2014. Inspectors found that privacy and dignity had improved, so this rating was now Good. The overall rating remained Good.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood how to recognise and report possible abuse.
“People were protected from abuse and harm and staff recognised the signs of potential abuse.” from the report
Trained staff
Staff had essential training, induction and supervision. The provider also supported staff to gain further qualifications.
“The training provided helped staff to obtain the skills and knowledge required to support the people who lived at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their privacy, dignity, choices and independence. Inspectors found that the earlier concerns about dignity had improved.
“We saw that staff respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's interests, likes, dislikes, communication needs and guidance about how support should be provided.
“The care plans provided staff with detailed guidance on the care and support people needed and how this should be delivered.” from the report
Regular quality checks
The home carried out weekly and monthly checks, including checks on care plans, medicines, accidents, food hygiene and safety.
“The provider had a policy and procedure for quality assurance.” from the report
Recent staffing reduction
minorStaffing levels had recently been reduced to reflect funded care hours. Inspectors said there were enough staff at the visit, but it was too early to know the effect of the change.
“This recent decrease in staff deployment had only occurred in the past week and it was too soon to say what impact this would have.” from the report
Medicines room temperature
minorThe temperature of the medicines room was not being monitored. Inspectors had no concern at the visit, but suggested checking it so medicines stayed within the manufacturer's recommendations.
“Currently the temperature in the medicines room was not monitored.” from the report
- 01How have staffing levels worked since the recent reduction, and how do you check that people's needs are still being met?
- 02How do you now monitor the temperature in the medicines room, particularly during very warm or cold weather?
- 03Seven of the eight people living at the home were reported not to have capacity to decide about their placement. Which applications for legal safeguards have now been authorised, and how are best-interest decisions recorded?
- 04How are each person's activity plans updated when their interests or confidence change?
- 05How do people and relatives raise concerns, and how are any complaints used to improve the service?
This was an unannounced routine inspection covering all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 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 Whitehaven
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.