CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Widecombe Nursing Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Widecombe Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found kind, respectful care, but two safeguarding reports were delayed.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 23 March and 12 April 2021. Two inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records and management documents.
The inspectors looked mainly at whether people were treated with kindness and respect, kept safe from abuse or neglect, and received respectful end of life care. They also checked infection prevention and control arrangements.
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw respectful care, good knowledge of people's needs, and compassionate support at the end of life. The home was rated Good overall, but the inspection did not give new ratings for the individual questions.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind. Inspectors saw compassionate interactions and found that people appeared comfortable with staff.
“People appeared relaxed and content in the presence of staff.” from the report
Staff knew people well
Staff understood people's individual needs and preferences. They used this knowledge to comfort people and provide more personal support.
“Staff knew the people they were supporting well.” from the report
End of life support
People were asked about their end of life wishes. The home aimed to keep people comfortable and support relatives to be present when wanted.
“Where people were nearing the end of their life, action was taken to keep them as comfortable as possible” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for preventing and managing infections, including the use of protective equipment and testing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Delayed safeguarding reports
needs fixingTwo recent safeguarding events were not reported when the registered manager was absent. The manager dealt with this after inspectors prompted action.
“However, in the registered manager's absence this was not done for two recent events.” from the report
Areas needing redecoration
minorThe home had a refurbishment plan for some areas that needed redecoration. The report does not say when this work would be completed.
“The registered manager confirmed there was a refurbishment plan in place to address some areas of the home that were in need of redecoration.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure safeguarding concerns are reported promptly when the registered manager is absent?
- 02How will you monitor that staff continue to protect people's privacy and dignity during personal care?
- 03How are people's end of life wishes recorded and reviewed when their condition changes?
- 04What areas are included in the refurbishment plan, and when will the work be completed?
- 05What infection control arrangements are currently used for visitors, testing and protective equipment?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns about safeguarding, dignity, kindness and end of life care, plus infection control; the overall Good rating was carried forward from the December 2017 inspection and the individual questions were not re-rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 April 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, December 2017
Widecombe Nursing Home rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but management records and follow-up still needed improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 20 October 2017. The inspectors reviewed information held by the CQC, spoke with people, relatives, staff and the manager, checked care and staff records, observed care, and reviewed complaints and quality monitoring.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safer medicine systems, suitable risk assessments, trained staff, kind care and personalised support. People were supported with their health, choices, activities and complaints.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. Audits had improved, but some problems found through audits were not put right. Required documents were missing or could not be found, including some supervision records, and a more detailed emergency evacuation plan was still needed.
The overall rating was Good. This followed improvements since November 2016, when the home was rated Requires Improvement and was in breach of regulations about the safe administration of medicines.
Enough staff
Inspectors found sufficient staff on duty to meet people's needs safely. The home had recruited more staff since the previous inspection.
“During this inspection we found that this was no longer a concern and there was adequate staff employed and deployed around the home to support people.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well, spent time with them and supported their choices, privacy and dignity.
“We observed positive interactions between staff and people who used the service. People were at ease and comfortable in the presence of staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. Staff adapted to individual routines, food choices and interests.
“There was clear evidence that the care provided was person centred and that the care plans reflected people's needs, choices and preferences.” from the report
Audit actions not always completed
needs fixingThe home had introduced quality audits, but issues identified through them were not always resolved. Missing supervision records had been noted several times and still could not be located.
“We did however find that where issues were picked up in audits these were not always resolved.” from the report
Emergency plan needed more detail
needs fixingThe home had an evacuation guide, but inspectors found that a more detailed personal emergency evacuation plan had not yet been created.
“They had not created a more detailed emergency plan [PEEP].” from the report
Some documents unavailable
minorDocumentation required for the inspection was not always available. This contributed to the Requires Improvement rating for well-led.
“Documentation required for the inspection was not always available.” from the report
- 01Have all missing supervision records been found or replaced, and how are staff supervision records checked now?
- 02What action was taken to make sure issues identified in quality audits are completed and signed off?
- 03Has the more detailed personal emergency evacuation plan been created for each person who needs one?
- 04How are medicines administered and staff competency checked under the electronic system?
- 05What activities are now available, following the planned recruitment of an activities person?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, carried out to check improvements since the November 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 December 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 Widecombe Nursing Home
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2017Goodup from Requires improvement
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Luton
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 £1,260 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
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.