CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Wickham House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, there were enough staff and infection control arrangements were suitable. Staff recruitment checks were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People were supported with their health, food, drink and communication needs. Staff received training and supervision, although some people moved in at short notice before a full assessment could be completed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw compassionate and respectful care. People were supported to follow their own routines and their privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs and preferences, and complaints were investigated and answered. There were no planned group activities during the visit, but staff provided individual activities and the home was recruiting another activities coordinator.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers understood their responsibilities and used audits and an improvement plan to monitor the service. Relatives and staff gave positive feedback, although satisfaction questionnaires had not yet been used.
What inspectors found, April 2022
Wickham House is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some building and activity issues to ask about.
This was the first comprehensive inspection since the service registered. It was unannounced and took place on 8 April 2022, with feedback completed on 14 April. The inspector spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment records, training and management audits.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable care planning, kind interactions and systems for handling concerns and improving the service.
Inspectors also noted some stained carpets and four toilets that were out of use while awaiting repairs. There were no planned group activities during the visit, although staff spent time with people individually and an activities programme was in place.
Safe care
Risks such as falls, choking and pressure ulcers were assessed, with guidance for staff. Inspectors also found that medicines and infection control were managed safely.
“People were provided with a service which was safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw patient, compassionate interactions. People’s privacy, dignity, independence and personal routines were respected.
“We observed caring interactions between staff and people using the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people’s needs, communication methods and preferences. Staff supported people to choose when to get up, go to bed and shower.
“People using the service were central to how care and support was provided.” from the report
Management oversight
Managers used audits and an improvement plan to identify and address shortfalls. Staff and relatives said managers were approachable and listened to concerns.
“The management team had a programme of audits to ensure they could monitor the service and take any actions to identify and address shortfalls promptly to improve the service provision.” from the report
Stained carpets
minorSome carpets were stained. The manager said equipment was being purchased to clean them.
“We noted there were some stained carpets, which the registered manager told us they were in the process of purchasing equipment to clean them.” from the report
Toilets awaiting repair
needs fixingFour toilets were out of use while the home waited for replacement parts. Ask whether all toilets are now available.
“In addition, there were four toilets out of use, the manager said they were waiting for parts to be delivered to repair them.” from the report
Limited group activities
minorThere were no planned group activities during the inspection visit. An activities programme existed, but the home was recruiting for a second activities coordinator.
“During our inspection visit there were no planned group activities, however, we saw staff spending time with people on a one to one basis.” from the report
No satisfaction questionnaires yet
minorThe home had not yet asked people, relatives or staff to complete satisfaction questionnaires. Managers said this was being considered.
“The registered manager told us the service have not yet asked people, relatives and staff to complete satisfaction questionnaires, but this was being considered.” from the report
- 01Have the four toilets that were out of use now been repaired, and are all facilities available?
- 02Have the stained carpets been cleaned or replaced since the inspection?
- 03How often are group activities offered now, and has a second activities coordinator been recruited?
- 04How do you now collect and act on feedback from people, relatives and staff?
- 05If someone moves in at short notice, how quickly is their full needs assessment completed?
This was the first comprehensive inspection since registration and covered all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 April 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, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements, but the home was empty and wider care was not assessed.
Inspectors visited on 17 November 2020. The visit was announced and focused on infection prevention and control because the home had been identified as a designated care setting for people leaving hospital with Covid-19.
Nobody was living in the home at the time. Inspectors found that it was being cleaned ready for admissions, visitors were temperature tested, and infection control procedures were in place. They were assured about arrangements for PPE, testing, social distancing, admissions and managing outbreaks.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating for the service.
Clean environment
The empty home was being cleaned to a good standard before admissions.
“The service was not currently in use but the provider was ensuring it was cleaned to a good standard ready to receive admissions.” from the report
Visitor infection checks
Professional visitors were temperature tested and had to complete infection control procedures before entering.
“Professional visitors were admitted through the main entrance and everyone was temperature tested and completed robust infection control procedures prior to entering the service.” from the report
Policies in place
The provider had prepared policies and guidance for the home, with plans to use them when people were admitted.
“The provider had developed robust policies, procedures and guidance for the location which the registered manager told us would be implemented when they received admissions.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the infection control policies described in the report being used now that people may be living at the home?
- 02How are individual health, safety and wellbeing risk assessments completed for each person admitted?
- 03What arrangements are currently in place for PPE, testing and visitor temperature checks?
- 04How are new admissions assessed and kept safe from infection?
- 05What areas of care have been inspected since this report, including medicines, staffing and activities?
This was an announced inspection focused on infection prevention and control at a designated care setting; nobody was living there and the other four questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 December 2020 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 Wickham House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
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. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.