CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Willow Bank Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control. This included visiting, testing, PPE, cleaning, social distancing and managing possible outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed as a separate rating in this targeted inspection, although inspectors noted up-to-date infection control procedures and regular quality checks.
What inspectors found, June 2021
Willow Bank Care Home: inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, but this targeted inspection was not rated.
Inspectors visited on 27 May 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic. It looked at infection prevention and control measures, rather than the whole service.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visiting, testing, vaccinations, PPE, social distancing, cleaning and infection risks. The premises were clean, spacious and well ventilated. Staff were observed following PPE and handwashing guidance.
The service was recorded as inspected but not rated. The report does not give a full overall rating or ratings for all five areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the provider had arrangements to prevent and manage infection risks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Safe visiting
The home had a system for visits, including testing and PPE, and inspectors said current guidance was being followed.
“The home had a clear system in place to support relatives and friends to visit people.” from the report
Clean and suitable environment
The premises were clean, spacious and ventilated. Cleaning schedules and changes to the layout supported infection control and social distancing.
“The premises were clean and communal areas were spacious and well ventilated.” from the report
PPE and handwashing checks
Staff were seen wearing appropriate PPE. The home carried out checks on PPE use, handwashing and infection control practice.
“Regular checks were carried out to ensure staff were following guidance including observations of how they were washing their hands” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current arrangements for relatives and friends to visit?
- 02How are staff and residents currently tested and supported with vaccinations?
- 03How often are cleaning schedules, PPE use and handwashing practice checked now?
- 04What is the home's current overall CQC rating and are there any later inspection reports?
- 05What arrangements are in place if an infection outbreak occurs?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 June 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, August 2019
Rated Good overall, but Safe requires improvement because some recruitment checks were incomplete.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 9 and 16 July 2019. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional. They observed care and reviewed care records, medicines records, audits and other documents.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were also rated Good. Inspectors found kind care, suitable support for health and nutrition, personalised care plans and strong management.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement, the same as at the previous inspection. Some staff employment histories had not been fully checked. Inspectors also found small safety issues during the visit, but these were corrected quickly. The home had improved since 2018 and was no longer in breach of regulations.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors saw staff communicating gently and protecting people's privacy and dignity.
“Throughout the inspection the atmosphere was relaxed, and we saw some caring and affectionate interventions.” from the report
Improved care planning
Care plans were person-centred and generally up to date. Staff said the records had improved and helped them provide the right support.
“People's care plans described the support required and were up to date. They contained person centred information.” from the report
Medicines and health support
Medicines were managed safely, with regular checks and trained staff. People had access to health professionals, including regular district nurse visits.
“Medication systems were organised, and people were receiving medication when they should.” from the report
Strong management and improvement
The home had a clear management structure and detailed audits. Inspectors found that the provider had acted on problems from the last inspection.
“The registered manager and nominated individual had completed a detailed action plan to address the requirements of the last inspection.” from the report
Incomplete employment histories
needs fixingTwo recruitment records did not show a full employment history. The missing checks were made during the inspection, but inspectors recommended that recruitment procedures be reviewed.
“We saw two records where the full employment history had not been identified.” from the report
Safe rating remains below Good
seriousInspectors said some aspects of the service were not always safe and that there was increased risk that people could be harmed. A personal evacuation plan and window restrictors needed immediate attention during the visit, and both were corrected.
“This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety.” from the report
Activities could be stronger
minorThe home offered a range of activities, but feedback was mixed. One person said they were bored and a relative wanted more stimulating options.
“The feedback we had about activities was mixed. One person said, they got bored.” from the report
Some worn flooring
minorMost communal areas were clean and well maintained, but the carpet in the small lounge was aged and worn in places. The provider said refurbishment was planned.
“In the small lounge the carpet was aged and worn in places.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to ensure every new staff member has a fully checked employment history?
- 02How do you check that personal evacuation plans continue to match changes in people's mobility?
- 03What activities are available for someone who becomes bored or needs more stimulation?
- 04How are people's end of life wishes recorded in a detailed and personalised plan?
- 05When will the worn carpet in the small lounge be replaced?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection checking action from the previous inspection, with ratings given for all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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 Willow Bank Care Home
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2018Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
99 live-in carers within about an hour of Bradford
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 £1,250 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.