CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wilfred Geere House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, admitted people safely, carried out testing and had arrangements to prevent or manage infection outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements at the home.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 10 February 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control measures. The home was providing intermediate care at the time.
Inspectors found clear visitor guidance, handwashing facilities, face masks and arrangements for social distancing. People admitted from hospital were isolated and tested as required. Staff and residents were included in whole-home testing.
The premises were extremely clean and hygienic. Inspectors were assured about the use of protective equipment, safe admissions, testing, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors were given clear information about the processes to follow when entering and leaving. Handwashing facilities, sanitiser and face masks were available.
“There was clear signage and information for visitors around processes to follow as they entered and left the home.” from the report
Isolation and testing
People were isolated or grouped safely when needed. People admitted from hospital were isolated for 14 days and were retested as required.
“People admitted from hospital were isolated in their own rooms for the required 14-day period.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home extremely clean and hygienic, with cleaning schedules in place.
“The premises looked extremely clean and hygienic and cleaning schedules were in place to ensure standards of hygiene were high.” from the report
Protective equipment and staff safety
There were separate areas for putting on and removing protective equipment. Signage about protective equipment and handwashing was visible around the home.
“There were separate areas for donning and doffing PPE safely and good signage about donning and doffing and handwashing was visible around the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control arrangements are currently in place for visitors, including handwashing, sanitiser and face masks?
- 02How are new admissions assessed, isolated and tested when they arrive from hospital?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 04How are cleaning schedules, protective equipment and social distancing arrangements checked and kept up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other care quality areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 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.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some occasional staffing pressure.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 March 2018. The inspector reviewed care records, staff files, training records, medicines, maintenance and quality checks. They also spoke with people, staff and health professionals, observed care and meals, and looked around the building.
The home provides respite care and some beds for people leaving hospital while their longer-term arrangements are assessed. Inspectors found safe medicines systems, suitable staffing on the inspection day, thorough assessments, good training and appropriate support for people's health and nutrition.
People were treated with kindness, patience and respect. Care plans recorded people's choices, activities were available, complaints were recorded and followed up, and staff and managers used audits and meetings to improve the service.
The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection on 21 January 2016. CQC found no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff being patient, kind and respectful. They also saw staff taking time to help people with medicines and meals without rushing them.
“Throughout the day we witnessed staff interacting with kindness, patience and respect with people who used the service.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were ordered, stored, given and disposed of safely. Records and instructions were checked, including arrangements for covert medicines, creams and thickened drinks.
“The systems for ordering, storage, administration and disposal of medicines were safe.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's abilities, preferences and choices. Staff adapted routines, including when people wanted to get up or preferred a particular gender of carer.
“The care plans we looked were person centred and included information about people's strengths and abilities as well as the support they required.” from the report
Good staff support and training
Staff had a thorough induction, ongoing training and regular supervision. Training included dementia, safe swallowing, falls prevention and end of life care.
“Staff were given a thorough induction on commencing employment at the service.” from the report
Active quality checks
The home recorded accidents and incidents, reviewed trends and carried out several audits. Managers used meetings and action plans to identify improvements.
“A number of audits were undertaken by the registered manager and senior staff.” from the report
Occasional staffing pressure
minorStaff told inspectors that staffing was sometimes an issue, and agency staff were occasionally used when the home was short-staffed. The report says staffing was sufficient on the inspection day and that more staff had recently been recruited.
“Staff we spoke with felt there were some occasions when staffing was an issue, and agency staff were sometimes used when the service was short.” from the report
- 01How often are agency staff used now, and how do you maintain consistency for people who need respite or hospital discharge care?
- 02How will you assess my relative's needs before admission, and how will you involve us in writing and reviewing their care plan?
- 03What arrangements are in place for medicines, including any swallowing difficulties, covert medicines or topical creams?
- 04What activities and support are available for my relative's cultural, religious and personal interests?
- 05How will you plan my relative's discharge and involve health professionals, the family and any services needed after they leave?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC areas, including the building and care provided; the previous Good ratings carried over because the overall rating had not changed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 April 2018 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 Wilfred Geere House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 November 2010.
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 Bolton
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. 92 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.