CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wilbraham House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, medicines, recruitment and infection prevention were managed safely, although feedback about staffing levels was mixed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and choices, and staff had relevant training and support. People had access to healthcare and their nutritional needs were monitored.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were offered choices and supported to maintain privacy, independence and relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and reflected people's preferences, interests and social histories. People could join activities and community outings, and knew how to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had monitoring systems, an improvement plan and an open culture. This rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, October 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, and the well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 15 and 17 September 2021. Inspectors spoke with 13 people, seven relatives, five staff and a visiting healthcare professional. They also observed care and checked care records, medicine records, training records and management information.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from harm, received their medicines safely, had care plans that reflected their needs and choices, and could access healthcare and activities.
People and relatives generally described staff as kind, respectful and responsive. The home had systems for checking risks, learning from incidents, handling complaints and gathering feedback. The Well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection to Good.
Safe recruitment and care
Inspectors found that staff were safely recruited and had the skills and knowledge needed to support people.
“People were supported by safely recruited staff, who had the skills and knowledge to provide effective support.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
“People were treated with kindness and respect by staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, interests and changing needs. Staff knew people well and adapted support accordingly.
“Care plans reflected people's likes, dislikes, and preferences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in activities in the home and community, and were supported to maintain important relationships.
“There was a varied programme of activities for people to choose from.” from the report
Improved leadership
The home had systems to monitor care, learn from incidents and involve people, relatives and staff in improvements.
“The registered manager had implemented a continuous improvement plan which detailed actions needed to ensure their governance systems were effective in monitoring all areas of the care provided.” from the report
Mixed views about staffing
minorOne person felt that one or two more staff were needed, although they said staff responded when called. The home used audits and a staffing tool to monitor this.
“They need one or two more staff, but if I call them, they come straight away.” from the report
Mixed views about food
minorPeople had different views about the meals. The home had asked residents for feedback and made menu changes in response.
“When I first came here it was home cooked food and I enjoyed that more than the meals now.” from the report
- 01How do you decide the staffing level for my relative's needs, and how do you respond if people feel staff are stretched?
- 02How can my relative influence the meals and request alternatives if they do not like the food?
- 03How will you keep my relative's care plan updated as their needs or preferences change?
- 04Which activities and community outings would be suitable for my relative, and how often could they take part?
- 05How will you share updates with our family and involve us in decisions about care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control measures; the previous rating was Good overall, with Well-led previously Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 October 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 2019
Wilbraham House: Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but management systems and records still needed improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 19 November 2019. They spoke with people living in the home, a relative and staff. They also observed care and checked care records, medicine records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. People were described as safe, treated with kindness and dignity, supported to make choices, and helped to take part in activities and access healthcare.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. Some monitoring systems were not fully in place, and records did not always show people's needs or the support they required. The overall rating was Good, and the home was no longer in breach of regulations from the previous inspection.
Cleaner environment
The home had improved its bathrooms, cleaning arrangements and infection control. People also reported that cleanliness had improved.
“There have been a lot of improvements in the last six months and the cleanliness has improved.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed staff being patient, friendly and respectful, while supporting privacy and independence.
“We observed caring interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff asked for consent and supported people to make decisions in ways suited to their communication needs. Equipment was available to help people do more for themselves.
“Staff encouraged people to make choices in the way they received their care and their wishes were respected.” from the report
Activities and community access
People could take part in activities such as singing, crafts and painting. They were also supported to go on outings and visit local shops.
“Activities are very good, there is something on every day like singing, craft, painting or outings.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The manager and provider had acted on the previous inspection and introduced new systems. Staff described the management as supportive and open to suggestions.
“The management team promoted a culture of openness and learning from mistakes within the service” from the report
Incomplete care records
needs fixingThe new electronic care system was not fully updated. Important information about how to support one person was missing, which could lead to inconsistent care from staff who did not know the person well.
“However, the records did not show this important information, which meant there was a risk of inconsistent care if staff were not familiar with this person's needs.” from the report
Fluid records were not always completed
needs fixingSome people's drinks were not consistently recorded, and there was no monitoring system for checking the fluid charts. The manager said a system would be introduced immediately.
“These records had not always been completed and there was not a system in place to monitor people's fluid charts to ensure staff were recording people's drinks as required.” from the report
Residents not always kept informed
minorSome people said communication about changes in the home could be better and that residents' meetings would be useful. The manager planned meetings and a monthly newsletter.
“We don't always know what is happening here, I think the lines of communication could be better, so we know about changes at the home.” from the report
Mixed views about food
minorPeople had different views about the food. The report says alternatives were provided when requested, and nutrition risks were monitored.
“I don't like the food that much. Some of it is okay but not all of it.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that fluid charts are completed and reviewed when required?
- 02Have all care records been updated with clear guidance about each person's needs and risks?
- 03How will you make sure improvements are maintained rather than only made temporarily?
- 04How are residents and relatives told about changes in the home?
- 05What is the current process for residents' meetings and the planned monthly newsletter?
This was an unannounced planned follow-up inspection covering all five key questions, carried out after the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 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.
Every inspection of Wilbraham House
7 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- October 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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 Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.