CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Willow Tree Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, prompt responses to call bells, safe medicines management and suitable risk assessments. Recruitment checks, infection control and equipment checks were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supervised, and people received support with food, drinks and healthcare. Inspectors found that consent was sought and mental capacity decisions were managed in line with the law.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They knew people well, supported individual choices and made time for personal relationships and activities.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences, communication needs and life histories. People were offered activities, supported to maintain relationships and given information about how to complain.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was described as well run, with approachable management, regular checks and systems to monitor quality. Staff, families and professionals said the management was supportive.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Willow Tree Lodge was rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring, and inspectors found safe, personalised care and strong management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 and 5 June 2019. Inspectors spoke with seven people, three relatives, ten staff members and two healthcare professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Caring. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, good training, personalised care plans, meaningful activities and a clean, homely environment.
People and relatives spoke very positively about the staff. Inspectors saw kind and respectful care, with staff knowing people well and supporting their choices, privacy and independence. The report says the home had strong systems for checking quality and managing risks.
The overall Good rating means the home met the CQC standards at the time of this inspection. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 16 November 2016, and all five question ratings remained the same.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff speaking to people with dignity and responding with patience and kindness. Staff built warm relationships and supported people to feel valued.
“We observed staff responding to people with kindness and patience.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors saw that people were not rushed and that staff responded promptly to call bells. Staffing was adjusted according to people's needs.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, life histories, communication needs and cultural or religious needs. Families were involved in developing and reviewing care plans.
“People had person centred care plans that described their individual needs and what was important to them.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People could take part in varied activities, including music, quizzes, exercises, visits and community links. Staff adapted activities to people's interests and emotions.
“People were provided with the opportunity to participate in a range of activities, including; quizzes, chair exercises, singing, pamper sessions, live music, exotic animals and farm animal visits” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were recorded, administered and stored safely. Staff received training and their medicines skills were checked.
“Medicines were safely managed, and accurate records were maintained of medicines received into the service, administered and disposed of.” from the report
Strong management checks
The provider and manager used audits, feedback and incident reviews to monitor the service and identify improvements. Staff felt able to raise concerns.
“The provider and registered manager had robust systems and processes to monitor quality within the home.” from the report
Limited garden access
minorThe garden was not fully suitable for people with limited mobility unless they had staff support. The manager said plans were in place for a flat seating area to improve access.
“However, this was only suitable for those with limited mobility, with staff support.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with the planned flat seating area so that people with limited mobility can use the garden?
- 02How will my relative and our family be involved in creating and regularly reviewing their care plan?
- 03What activities would be suitable for my relative's interests, communication needs and mobility?
- 04How are medicines, including as-required medicines, checked and reviewed for each person?
- 05How will my relative's end of life wishes, religious preferences and pain relief needs be recorded and followed?
This was an unannounced inspection that covered all five CQC questions, with ratings given for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 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.
What inspectors found, January 2017
Rated Good overall; caring was Outstanding, with the other four areas rated Good.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 16 November 2016. Two inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, training information and checks on the home.
Inspectors found that people were safe and that medicines were managed safely. There were enough staff, recruitment checks were completed, and the home and equipment were checked. Staff had training and support, people's food and healthcare needs were met, and care plans were detailed and personal.
The strongest finding was about caring. Staff were described as exceptionally caring, respectful and committed. The home had activities, a complaints process and systems for listening to people and relatives. Inspectors also found effective checks to monitor the service.
A Good rating means the home met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection. Caring was rated Outstanding, while Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were each rated Good. The previous inspection in December 2013 found that the provider was meeting the regulations inspected.
Exceptionally caring staff
Inspectors saw warm and thoughtful interactions. Staff understood people's individual needs and were described as highly motivated and committed.
“We found that staff were exceptionally caring. We observed kind, caring and thoughtful interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were given, stored and managed safely. Inspectors also found enough staff to meet people's needs and suitable checks before staff started work.
“We considered that there was a safe system in place for the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Personal care planning
Care plans covered each person's needs, preferences and daily life. People were supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“We read four people's care plans and noted that these were detailed and person- centred.” from the report
Effective oversight
The provider used regular audits, checks and computer systems to monitor care, staff support and the premises. Feedback from people, relatives and staff was used to make changes.
“Our observations and findings on the day of our inspection confirmed that the provider had an effective quality monitoring system in place.” from the report
Some people wanted more activities
minorThere was an activities programme and people could choose not to join in. However, one relative felt that more activities could sometimes be provided.
“A third relative stated that at times they felt that more activities could be provided.” from the report
Clothing sometimes went missing
minorOne relative raised an issue about missing socks. The report says the manager discussed this with the relative and laundry department.
“One relative had raised an issue that their family member's socks sometimes went missing.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure there are enough activities for people with different interests, including those who prefer quieter activities?
- 02What system do you now use to prevent clothing and other belongings from going missing?
- 03Have there been any changes to staffing levels, the registered manager or the management team since the November 2016 inspection?
- 04How are relatives involved in reviewing and updating each person's care plan?
- 05How do you check that medicines continue to be administered, stored and recorded safely?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and giving ratings for the overall service and each area. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 January 2017 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 Tree Lodge
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 February 2012.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.