CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wilton Villas
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Risk assessments were regularly reviewed, staffing and recruitment were suitable, medicines were safely managed and infection control arrangements were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clearer leadership, improved quality checks and better reporting of concerns. Managers and staff understood their responsibilities and had an action plan for further improvement.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Wilton Villas was rated Good; inspectors found safer care and stronger management, with some delays in working with community mental health teams.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 6 May 2021. One inspector spoke with three people living at the home and several staff and managers. They reviewed care records, risk assessments, medicines records and other records about how the home was run.
Inspectors found that people were protected from avoidable harm. Risk assessments were clear and regularly reviewed. Incidents involving drug use and anti-social behaviour had reduced substantially. Medicines were stored safely and administration records were properly completed.
The home had improved its leadership and monitoring systems. Staff understood their roles, audits were being completed and action was taken when problems were found. The home worked more consistently with community health and social care professionals.
The overall rating was Good. The previous rating was Requires Improvement, published in December 2019. This inspection only checked Safe and Well-led. The other ratings were carried forward from earlier inspections.
Fewer serious incidents
The home had reviewed its safeguarding processes and changed how it responded to drug use and anti-social behaviour. Inspectors found that incidents had reduced substantially.
“There had been a substantial reduction in the levels of incidents, so much so that hardly any incidents had taken place that required reporting to CQC or partner health and social care agencies.” from the report
Clear risk planning
Risk assessments described current and past risks, including substance misuse and possible harm to people. They also told staff what action to take.
“The risk assessments for each person described people's current risks, including behaviours or potential substance misuse and what should be done to address these issues if they arose.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Staff were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines. Medicines were securely stored and administration records were properly completed.
“Medicines were securely stored in a locked medicines cabinet in a room adjacent to the main staff office.” from the report
Stronger management checks
The home used audits and daily and weekly checks to monitor medicines, care records, incidents, complaints, health and safety and staffing. Action was taken when checks found problems.
“Following these audits, action had been taken to rectify any deficiencies noted.” from the report
More consistent partnership working
The home reported concerns more reliably and worked more regularly with community health and social care professionals.
“This had improved, along with responses by the service to any such incidents.” from the report
Delays from mental health teams
minorThe home said there could still be delays when waiting for responses from community mental health teams. Inspectors nevertheless found that engagement with partner agencies had become more consistent.
“The service acknowledged that there could still be delays with receiving a response from community mental health teams” from the report
Variable meeting attendance
minorAttendance at joint meetings with people living at the home varied. The report says the last two meetings had been attended by at least half of the people living there.
“Attendance of people using the service at these meetings varied, although the last two meetings were attended by at least half of the people using the service.” from the report
- 01How quickly can you obtain help from community mental health teams when someone’s mental health deteriorates?
- 02How do you respond if someone uses drugs or becomes involved in anti-social behaviour in or around the home?
- 03What are the current ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive, which were not inspected during this visit?
- 04How are people supported if they do not want to engage with rehabilitation or support services?
- 05How do people living at the home influence decisions through communal meetings, given that attendance has varied?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from previous comprehensive inspections. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 May 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, December 2019
Wilton Villas was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks from anti-social behaviour and poor food-storage cleanliness, although medicines and care records were generally managed well.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 12 August 2019. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led because concerns had been raised about people's safety and how the home was managed. They spoke with two people and 11 staff, and reviewed care, medicines, risk and incident records.
The home had clear, regularly reviewed risk assessments for people's mental health and support needs. Medicines were stored securely and records were properly completed. Staff understood safeguarding procedures, and staffing levels were considered suitable.
However, long-standing anti-social behaviour linked to drug use had not been dealt with effectively enough. Inspectors also found unclean food cupboards and unsafe food storage. The quality checks had not identified or reduced these risks, and one police incident had not been reported to CQC.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection, published on 9 August 2018, to Requires Improvement. This means some aspects of the home were not always safe and there was limited assurance that risks were being managed properly.
Clear risk assessments
Inspectors found that people's day-to-day mental health and support risks were clearly recorded and regularly reviewed.
“risk assessments concerning people's day to day mental health and other support needs were clear and regularly reviewed.” from the report
Medicines management
Medicines were locked away, administration records were properly completed, and staff had training and competency checks.
“Medicines were securely stored in a locked medicines cabinet in a room adjacent to the main staff office.” from the report
Suitable staffing
Inspectors were told that staffing levels remained suitable, with options to increase staffing when needed.
“Staffing levels remained suitable and the option to increase staffing in specific circumstances was available” from the report
Respectful support
People could approach staff freely, and the home had expectations about dignity, respect and freedom from discrimination.
“people freely able to approach staff and engage with them without hesitation.” from the report
Anti-social behaviour
seriousLong-standing anti-social behaviour connected with drug use had not been reduced effectively enough. Inspectors said this created an increased risk that people could be harmed.
“This had not been fully effective at making sure that the anti-social behaviour did not adversely affect people using this service.” from the report
Insufficient learning from incidents
seriousThe provider had taken some actions, such as extra walk rounds, but inspectors did not think enough had been learnt from earlier incidents. A spot check after suspected drug use was also delayed.
“we did not judge that the provider had fully learnt lessons from previous incidents.” from the report
Food hygiene
needs fixingSeveral food cupboards were unclean and contained food or other residue. Inspectors said checks of cleaning were not thorough enough.
“many cupboards we looked into were unclean and had food or other residue within them.” from the report
Quality monitoring
seriousThe home's monitoring systems checked several routine areas but had not properly identified and reduced the risks from anti-social behaviour.
“We did not consider that the provider's quality monitoring systems were effectively assessing, monitoring and mitigating these risks” from the report
Missed notification
needs fixingThe provider usually reported concerns as required, but one recent incident involving the police had not been reported to CQC.
“we found one instance in July 2019 where the police were called and we had not been notified about this.” from the report
- 01What specific action has been taken to reduce anti-social behaviour and drug-related risks around the home?
- 02How do you now check that lessons from incidents are acted on and followed up?
- 03How often are communal kitchens, cupboards and food storage areas checked, and who records these checks?
- 04What is the current process for carrying out room spot checks when drug use is suspected?
- 05Have all police, safeguarding and other reportable incidents since this inspection been notified to CQC when required?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key questions were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 December 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 Wilton Villas
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015Insufficient evidence to rateSafe: GoodResponsive: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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 Islington
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 £1,260 a week. 74 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“The interaction she gives my mother is incredible, singing, dancing, taking her to groups, on plenty of walks which mum always loves.”
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.