CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Willow House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, testing, personal protective equipment, safe admissions, cleaning and visiting arrangements. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and safe visiting arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 27 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable policies, testing, personal protective equipment and cleaning arrangements. Staff followed hand hygiene and infection control procedures. The home also provided a separate visitor pod and a temporary staff changing area.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating. It is not a full assessment of all five areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors found up-to-date COVID-19 policies, suitable protective equipment and staff who followed infection control procedures.
“All staff had received training and followed correct processes for using PPE and maintaining infection control standards.” from the report
Safe visiting
The home supported visits using testing, protective equipment, risk assessments, enhanced cleaning and a separate visitor pod.
“The provider introduced a visiting pod as an additional option for people and their families.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was described as clean and fresh, with extra cleaning of frequently touched surfaces and regular checks.
“The service was clean and fresh. In addition to the regular cleaning regime, staff carried out regular cleaning of any frequently touch point surfaces.” from the report
Staff and visitor vaccination checks
The service was meeting the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you managing staffing pressures now, and could they affect the care provided?
- 02How do you arrange visits for relatives who do not want to use the visitor pod?
- 03What testing, vaccination and personal protective equipment rules currently apply to staff and visitors?
- 04How often are frequently touched surfaces cleaned, and how do you check that this has happened?
- 05What ratings or findings apply to caring, effective care, responsive care and leadership, as these were not assessed in this inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 2022 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 2019
Rated Good overall, but well-led Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, safe care and some records still needed improving.
This was an unannounced inspection over 11 and 12 March 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and managers. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff records and checks on the quality of the home.
People told inspectors they felt safe and well cared for. Staff were kind, knew people well and there were enough staff. Care was personalised, activities were available and the home was clean and well maintained.
Some improvements were still needed. Guidance for occasional medicines was not always clear, records about best-interest decisions were not clear, and the home had been slow to tell CQC about certain events. The overall rating was Good, but the well-led rating was Requires Improvement.
Kind and respectful care
People said they were happy and well cared for. Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Enough staff
People, relatives and staff felt there were enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.
“People received care and support from sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, interests, medical history and communication needs. Staff knew people well and supported individual choices.
“People receive individualised care and support from staff who knew them well.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good. Relatives and staff linked this progress to the new management team.
“Relatives and staff told us the home had significantly improved since the last inspection” from the report
Activities and community links
People could choose from activities such as music therapy, animal therapy, crafts, exercises, films, games and quizzes. They were also supported to access local churches, shops and cafés.
“We saw a range of activities were available including music therapy, animal therapy, arts and crafts, arm chair exercises, film afternoons, card games and quizzes.” from the report
Occasional medicines guidance
needs fixingInstructions for medicines taken only when needed were not always clear. Inspectors recommended a review so staff could give these medicines consistently.
“Guidance had not always been provided to staff to help ensure those medicines were administered in a consistent way.” from the report
Best-interest decision records
needs fixingRecords did not clearly show whether the right people, such as relatives, had been consulted when decisions were made for someone who could not decide for themselves.
“We found people were supported and encouraged to make decisions for themselves, however records relating to decision made in a person's best interests were not clear.” from the report
Reporting events to CQC
needs fixingThe home had been slow to tell CQC about some events it was legally required to report. The manager said reporting procedures would be reviewed.
“However, we noted the home had been slow to tell us (CQC) about specific events which took place at the home which they were legally required to do.” from the report
Quality systems still bedding in
needs fixingInspectors found improvements, but said they needed more time to become established and show sustained improvement. Some issues included medicines recording and the fire evacuation procedure.
“However, these changes needed time to fully embed and some improvements were still required.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to the guidance for medicines that people take only when needed?
- 02How do you now record best-interest decisions, and how are relatives involved in those decisions?
- 03What system do you use to make sure accidents and other legally reportable events are sent to CQC on time?
- 04Have all medicines recording issues identified at the inspection been resolved?
- 05When was the fire evacuation procedure last reviewed and tested?
This was an unannounced inspection that looked at all five CQC questions and the overall quality and safety of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 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 House
6 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 November 2013.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.