CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Whitmore Vale House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe medicines systems and effective infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff had received refresher training. Capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were completed when restrictive practices were considered, and people were supported with food, drink and health care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions and supported to maintain their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, wishes and communication styles. People had activities and community opportunities, although outings were sometimes limited by a lack of drivers.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager and a clear management structure. Audits, meetings and feedback were used to identify and address improvements.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, although limited drivers sometimes restricted outings.
Inspectors visited without notice on 21 June 2023. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files, training and management systems.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were supported to make choices, develop skills and stay independent. Inspectors found good relationships between people and staff, suitable staffing, safe medicines practice and access to health care.
There had been improvements since the previous inspection, when the overall rating was Requires Improvement. The home now had a registered manager, staff had received refresher training and capacity assessments had improved. Inspectors also found that some people could not go out as often as they wished because there were not enough drivers.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, learn life skills and take part in everyday tasks. Staff also supported people to go out and pursue personal goals.
“People were cared for by staff who supported them to learn new life skills and retain their independence.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw relaxed and respectful interactions between people and staff. Relatives and people described staff as helpful, kind and supportive.
“There were good relationships between people and staff.” from the report
Safe care
Staff understood people's risks and how to reduce them. Medicines, staffing, recruitment, fire safety and infection control were checked and found to be safe.
“People received the medicines they were prescribed and were supported to access health care professional input when needed.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's health needs, preferences and communication methods. Staff knew people well and supported individual routines and aspirations.
“People received person-centred, individualised care as a result from staff who knew people and their needs well.” from the report
Limited access to outings
needs fixingSome staff and relatives said people could not always go out because there were not enough drivers. Home-based activities were used instead at those times.
“They don't go out very often – haven't got the staff or the drivers for this.” from the report
Some care plan information needed updating
minorThe home's audits identified contradictory or out-of-date information in some care plans. An action plan was in place to address this.
“Such as identifying contradictory or out of date information in people's care plans.” from the report
- 01How often can people currently go out, and what is being done about the shortage of drivers?
- 02How do you check that each person's care plan is current and does not contain contradictory information?
- 03What activities are available when transport or drivers are not available?
- 04How are people involved in setting and reviewing their personal goals and care plans?
- 05What improvements have been made since the previous Requires Improvement inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 July 2023 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, January 2021
Whitmore Vale House is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind care and better systems, but there was no registered manager and staff training gaps remained.
This was an announced, focused inspection on 3 December 2020. Three inspectors spoke with eight people and nine staff. They checked care and medicine records, recruitment files, management records and infection control arrangements.
The home was rated Good for Safe. People said they felt safe, staffing was sufficient, medicines records were complete, risks were reviewed and infection control arrangements did not raise major concerns.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. Inspectors found better audits, communication and improvement planning, but there was still no registered manager. They also found gaps in staff training.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement, the same as at the previous inspection. Safe improved from Requires Improvement to Good. The inspection did not assess all five areas of care.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and staff understood safeguarding concerns and how to report them.
“People said they felt safe living at Whitmore Vale House and staff were kind to them.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors saw staff available to support people promptly. Recruitment records included checks such as references and DBS checks.
“We observed staff around and supporting people in a timely manner.” from the report
Medicines records
Medicines records and personalised support plans were complete and up to date. Staff had medicines training and competency checks.
“Support plans and MARs records were up to date and complete with no gaps.” from the report
Infection control
The environment was clean, protective equipment was available and the inspection found no major infection control concerns.
“As part of this inspection we carried out an infection prevention and control assessment which did not identify any major concerns about the service.” from the report
Improved oversight
Audits were being completed and actions were followed up. Senior management had an improvement plan linked to the previous inspection.
“In addition, senior management had developed an improvement plan following our last inspection and regularly updated us on progress against the plan.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe service did not have a manager registered with the CQC. Inspectors said this was a legal requirement and that leadership would continue to be monitored.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
Training gaps
needs fixingInspectors found that some staff had not completed health and safety, food hygiene, first aid or autism training. The provider was reminded to complete this and CQC planned to check it again.
“Of the 16 staff, eight had not completed health and safety training, 12 food hygiene, seven first aid and seven autism.” from the report
- 01Who is currently responsible for managing the home while there is no registered manager?
- 02Have all staff now completed the outstanding health and safety, food hygiene, first aid and autism training?
- 03How are you checking that the improvement plan from the previous inspection is still being followed?
- 04How do you make sure people's risk assessments and care plans stay up to date?
- 05When will the next comprehensive inspection take place, and what improvements will you provide evidence of?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only, so Effective, Caring and Responsive were not assessed during this visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 January 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.
Every inspection of Whitmore Vale House
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.