CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Willowbrook
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, safe admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and visiting arrangements. The provider also said it had measures to reduce the risks from COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- 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 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 3 March 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected the home.
Inspectors found good systems for managing COVID-19. The home was clean, had enough protective equipment, and staff followed guidance on hand washing, testing and using protective equipment.
Visiting arrangements followed government guidance. Visitors had to complete checks, show a negative lateral flow test, have their temperature checked and wear protective equipment.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the other areas of care.
Infection control
Staff followed infection prevention procedures and used protective equipment safely. The home had supplies of protective equipment and stations outside rooms where people were isolating.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home followed government guidance for visits. Families were given information, and visitors completed testing and health checks before entering.
“The provider was following government guidance regarding visiting arrangements. People told us they were happy that their family members could visit them in the service.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean. High-touch areas were cleaned more often and cleaning records and infection control audits were completed.
“The service was clean. We observed increased cleaning of high touch point were in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are now in place to manage staffing pressures and prevent them affecting people's care?
- 02What are the current rules for family visits, including testing, screening and protective equipment?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested for infections now?
- 04How are cleaning checks and infection control audits recorded and followed up?
- 05How are new residents assessed and admitted safely?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 March 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, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and effective rehabilitation care, with two minor issues addressed during the inspection.
The inspection took place without notice on 18 July 2019. Two inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff, managers, relatives and health professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicine records, staff recruitment files, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicine systems, detailed care plans and good support with health, rehabilitation, independence, activities and relationships.
Inspectors found that one care plan did not explain how poor vision affected a person's safety. The manager corrected this immediately. They also found that people's wishes about end of life care had not been explored, and a process was put in place to address this.
The home was rated Good overall, the same as at the previous inspection published in March 2017. This means inspectors judged the service to be consistently managed and to provide good-quality care, but not that every part was perfect.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks and organised medicine systems. Medicine records were accurate and checked for mistakes.
“Medicines and the medication administration records in use were accurate, and regularly checked for any mistakes.” from the report
Rehabilitation and independence
Rehabilitation was central to the home’s approach. Staff supported people to regain skills, make choices and work towards personal goals.
“Promoting rehabilitation and independence was a part of the ethos of the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People had warm relationships with staff. Inspectors found that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“People's privacy and dignity was maintained by staff at all times.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, communication needs, cultural and religious needs, and rehabilitation goals.
“People's care plans were comprehensive, and outcome focused so staff could provide a consistent level of support” from the report
Good leadership
The manager used audits, feedback and action plans to monitor the service. Staff felt supported and concerns were acted on.
“The provider's internal quality audits were detailed, and the monitoring systems were effectively used to check all aspects of the service and people's care.” from the report
Poor vision was missing from one risk plan
minorOne person's care plan did not explain how poor vision affected their safety. Inspectors raised this and it was corrected immediately.
“We found a person's care plan had not considered how their poor vision impacted their safety.” from the report
End of life wishes had not been explored
needs fixingPeople's records included next of kin and cultural or religious information, but not their end of life wishes. The manager introduced a process to address this.
“However, people's end of life care wishes had not been explored.” from the report
- 01How do you now assess and record the effect of poor vision or other sensory needs on a person's safety?
- 02How and when will you discuss and record my relative's end of life wishes?
- 03What rehabilitation goals would you set with my relative, and how would you measure their progress?
- 04How do you make sure staffing levels, including at night, match people's activities and support needs?
- 05How would you involve my relative, family and health professionals when care needs change?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment; all five ratings were assessed and remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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 Willowbrook
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 June 2014.
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 Leicester
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 £1,270 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Tino was the most wonderfully rounded, empathetic and intuitive person. He not only developed a great relationship with Neville but also had a great working relationship with our existing carer.”
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.