CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Whyke Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind staff and safe medicines, but identified serious concerns about shared bedrooms, consent and management checks.
This was an unannounced inspection. One inspector and an Expert by Experience visited on 14 and 19 April 2022. They spoke with people living in the home, staff, relatives and health and social care professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and management checks.
The home was rated Requires Improvement in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People generally felt safe, medicines were managed safely, staff were kind and there were enough staff. People also received food, drinks and healthcare support.
However, the inspectors found that some people sharing bedrooms did not have their capacity properly assessed or their best interests recorded. People receiving end of life care did not always receive enough privacy and dignity. Risk assessments and checks on accidents, incidents and service quality were not reliable enough.
The provider breached Regulations 9, 11 and 17. The CQC issued a warning notice for person-centred care, made a recommendation about the premises and required an action plan. It said it would monitor progress and consider further action if needed.
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and assessed before giving medicines. The home used audits, stock checks and guidance for medicines given when needed.
“People received their medicines safely. Staff were trained and their competencies were assessed prior to them administering medicines to people.” from the report
Kind, consistent staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Staff knew people well and encouraged independence where possible.
“People were cared for by consistent and kind staff who promoted their independence where possible.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People's food, drink and weight were monitored when needed. Staff worked with health professionals and followed advice to support people's health.
“People were supported to access healthcare services when needed and staff worked with professionals to provide good outcomes for people.” from the report
Safeguarding awareness
Staff had safeguarding training and knew how to recognise and report possible abuse. People and relatives felt able to raise concerns.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff received safeguarding training and knew how to recognise and respond to signs of potential abuse.” from the report
Privacy and end of life care
seriousSome people receiving end of life care shared rooms. The inspectors found that curtains did not give enough privacy and that care could affect the other person's sleep and personal preferences.
“The provider had failed to ensure people receive person centred care and treatment that was appropriate to their needs and reflected their personal preferences.” from the report
Consent for shared bedrooms
seriousThe home had not properly assessed whether people had capacity to agree to sharing a bedroom. It had also failed to record best-interest decisions.
“MCA assessments had not been carried out in relation to people sharing bedrooms.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousThe home counted accidents and incidents but did not look for patterns such as where or when they happened. Its wider quality systems did not reliably identify risks or lead to improvement.
“Accidents and incidents were not analysed robustly.” from the report
Environmental risks
needs fixingThe risk of legionella had not been assessed, and the fire risk assessment had not been updated after concerns from the fire service. The CQC made a recommendation about the premises.
“The risk of legionella had not been assessed and there was no system in place to flush through infrequently used taps to reduce the risk to people of legionnaires disease.” from the report
Complaint follow-up
needs fixingOne relative said they were not confident that a verbal complaint had been dealt with, although the written complaints policy was appropriate.
“One relative told us they had made a verbal complaint but were not confident their complaint had been addressed.” from the report
- 01Which residents currently share bedrooms, and how have their consent, capacity and best-interest decisions been recorded?
- 02How will privacy be protected if someone receiving end of life care shares a bedroom?
- 03What action has been taken to assess legionella risk and to update the fire risk assessment?
- 04How are accidents and incidents now analysed for patterns and used to improve care?
- 05What was the outcome of the warning notice and what evidence can you show that the required improvements have been made?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care home covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; it was the first inspection of the newly registered service. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 June 2022 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 2021
Whyke Lodge: targeted inspection found good infection control, but the service was not rated overall.
Inspectors visited on 10 March 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It looked at infection prevention and control in the home.
Inspectors found that visitors were screened, tested and given protective equipment. The home had cleaning arrangements, supplies of PPE, social distancing measures and plans to isolate people when needed.
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends by telephone, the internet and carefully managed visits. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Safe family visits
The home provided different ways for people to stay in contact with relatives while reducing the risk of infection. This included garden, window and indoor pod visits.
“The service facilitated in-person visits in a manner which minimised the risk of infection spread, such as garden and window visits.” from the report
Visitor safety checks
Visitors were screened on arrival, had their temperature checked and were given rapid testing and PPE before entering.
“Visitors were asked a series of screening questions, had their temperature checked on arrival and were subject to rapid lateral flow testing.” from the report
Cleaning and PPE
The home carried out extra cleaning and monthly checks of infection prevention arrangements. PPE was available throughout the home.
“Additional cleaning of all areas and monthly auditing of infection prevention processes were carried out.” from the report
Plans for isolation
The home had plans to isolate people when needed, including after a hospital stay, with one-to-one support during isolation.
“One to one care and support arrangements were provided to those people required to isolate within their rooms.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently screen and test visitors before they enter the home?
- 02What PPE is available now, and where is it kept?
- 03What is your current plan if someone returns from hospital and needs to isolate?
- 04How often do you now audit infection prevention and cleaning arrangements?
- 05How can residents currently keep in touch with family and have in-person visits?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, and it did not provide an overall quality rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 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 Whyke Lodge
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- June 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 November 2020.
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.