CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wilhelmina House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, admissions, testing, personal protective equipment, social distancing and infection outbreaks appropriately.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection prevention and control measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 March 2021. It looked at how the home was preventing and controlling COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors found that visitors were screened and tested where needed, and used a separate conservatory entrance. People were supported to keep in touch with relatives by phone and video calls.
The home tested new admissions, isolated them for 14 days and continued testing. Staff used personal protective equipment correctly, and risk assessments and training were in place.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating, and it did not assess all areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visitors used a separate conservatory area and were screened on arrival. Testing was also carried out for visitors who were not on the national testing programme.
“All visitors were asked COVID-19 screening questions on arrival and had their temperature checked.” from the report
Safe admissions
New residents were admitted only after a negative COVID-19 test, then isolated for 14 days with ongoing testing.
“People were admitted only with a negative COVID-19 test and were isolated for 14 days to reduce the risk of transmission of the virus, with ongoing testing.” from the report
PPE and distancing
The home had a dedicated area for putting on and removing personal protective equipment. Inspectors saw staff following PPE and social distancing guidance.
“Our observations during the inspection confirmed staff were adhering to PPE and social distancing guidance.” from the report
Contact and activities
People were supported to keep in regular contact with relatives through phone and video calls. The home also continued socially distanced activities.
“Staff supported people to keep in regular contact with relatives and loved ones through regular phone and video calls.” from the report
Risk assessment and training
The provider completed risk assessments for staff and residents, and provided training about COVID-19, infection control and safe PPE use.
“The provider trained staff and people using the service in relation to COVID-19, infection control and safe use of PPE.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your COVID-19 visitor, testing and PPE arrangements changed since the inspection on 11 March 2021?
- 02What are your current arrangements for visits by relatives?
- 03How do you safely admit new residents now, including testing and any period of isolation?
- 04When was the home last assessed on caring, responsiveness, effectiveness and leadership?
- 05How do you currently support residents to keep in touch with relatives and take part in activities?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not assess all five areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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, March 2018
Wilhelmina House is rated Good; inspectors found kind, responsive care, with some safety and food-record systems needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 January 2018. The inspectors spoke with people living at the home, staff and managers. They observed care, a mealtime and a staff handover. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas. People were described as safe, well cared for and treated with dignity. Staff responded promptly to call bells, supported people's independence and provided activities that people enjoyed.
Inspectors found some areas that needed strengthening. These included written plans for pressure-ulcer risks, checks on medicine-storage temperatures, testing of some showers, infection-control audits and information about people's dietary needs. The home said it would act on these points.
The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection in June and July 2015. The report says it continued to meet the regulations checked.
Kind and respectful staff
People were very positive about the staff. Inspectors saw caring interactions and found that staff understood people's communication needs, dignity and preferences.
“People were very happy with the staff who supported them and told us they were trustworthy, kind, caring and very helpful.” from the report
Good care information
Care plans included people's backgrounds, needs, preferences and interests. They were reviewed regularly so staff could respond to changes.
“People's care plans reflected their background, physical, mental, emotional and social needs, people who were important to them, preferences, interests and aspirations.” from the report
Activities and community links
The home offered activities based on people's interests and had links with community groups, a church and a local day centre.
“The activities were well attended and people actively participated and enjoyed the activities.” from the report
Pressure-ulcer plans
seriousThe home was taking action to reduce pressure-ulcer risks, but the actions were not written into management plans. This meant staff did not have a clear written guide to refer to.
“The provider had not recorded their management plans to reduce risks relating to pressure ulcers.” from the report
Medicine-storage temperatures
seriousMedicines were administered and recorded safely, but the temperature of two medicine-storage rooms was not monitored. The home said it would rectify this immediately.
“The provider did not monitor the temperature of the two rooms where medicines were stores.” from the report
Some water-temperature checks
needs fixingThe home checked some water temperatures, but not all en-suite showers each month. The home said it would review its system to reduce the risk of scalding.
“En-suite showers across the service were not all tested each month.” from the report
Dietary information
needs fixingThe stand-in chef was unsure about people's dietary needs and preferences. Information in the kitchen had not been updated since July 2017 and might have been out of date.
“The stand-in we spoke with was unsure of people's dietary needs and preferences.” from the report
- 01How are pressure-ulcer risks now recorded in each person's care plan, and how do you check staff follow those plans?
- 02How do you monitor temperatures in all rooms where medicines are stored?
- 03How often are en-suite shower temperatures tested, and can I see the records?
- 04How do kitchen staff receive up-to-date information about allergies, special diets and food preferences?
- 05What changes have you made to infection-control audits since this inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 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 Wilhelmina House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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 Croydon
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. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.