CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Winchley Home
Rated Inadequate: inspectors found the home performing badly and the CQC has taken enforcement action.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control, but outbreak planning and individual COVID-19 risk assessments needed improvement.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 14 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19-related staffing pressures were affecting the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, supported testing and vaccinations, cleaned regularly, followed visiting guidance and managed infection risks for admissions and visitors.
There were two gaps. The home did not have a comprehensive contingency plan for an outbreak, and individual COVID-19 risk assessments were not in place for people living there. The manager said the plan had been updated and that the risk assessments would be completed.
The service was inspected but not rated. This inspection did not provide a full quality rating for the home.
Infection prevention
Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing visitors from spreading infections and was following shielding and social distancing rules.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Cleaning and supplies
The home had suitable PPE and cleaning materials. Daily cleaning, including frequently touched areas, was recorded.
“Daily cleaning including regular touchpoint areas were completed and documented.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
The home had systems for regular testing, and people and staff had received vaccinations in line with government guidance.
“People and staff had received their vaccinations in line with government guidance.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home followed current visiting guidance and carried out checks when visitors arrived.
“The provider ensured current government guidelines in relation to visiting were followed.” from the report
Outbreak planning
needs fixingThe home did not have a comprehensive contingency plan for an outbreak at the time of inspection. The manager later said the plan had been updated.
“The provider had not ensured a comprehensive contingency plan in the event of an outbreak.” from the report
Individual risk assessments
needs fixingIndividual COVID-19 risk assessments had not been completed for people living at the home. The manager said these would be put in place.
“The provider had not ensured individual risk assessments relating to COVID-19 were in place for people living at Winchley Home.” from the report
- 01Has the contingency plan for a COVID-19 outbreak now been completed, and what does it cover?
- 02Have individual COVID-19 risk assessments been completed for every person living at the home?
- 03How often are infection control policies, PPE supplies and cleaning records checked?
- 04How does the home manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19?
- 05How are visiting arrangements kept in line with current guidance?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide ratings for the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 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, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with clear improvements since the previous inspection.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 11 September 2018. They spoke with residents, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files, meeting notes and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, clean premises and good support with food, health care and daily choices.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement in April 2017, with two legal breaches. Inspectors found that the required improvements had been made and that all outstanding legal requirements had been met.
Safe care and medicines
Risks were assessed and reviewed, with guidance for staff. Medicines were stored, administered and recorded through safe systems.
“The management of people's medicines was safe and robust and people received these as the prescriber intended.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff supported people warmly and respectfully. They protected privacy and dignity and responded promptly when people asked for help.
“Throughout our inspection, we saw positive interactions between the staff and the people using the service.” from the report
Improved activities and choice
The home had introduced a wider activities programme. People could choose whether to join activities and could use communal areas or spend time in their rooms.
“People and their relatives said the planned activities in the service had improved, were varied and enjoyable.” from the report
Stronger management
The manager had introduced regular audits, reviewed incidents and worked on a service improvement plan. Inspectors found that these changes had improved care.
“The registered manager had implemented widespread improvements which had driven up the quality of the provision of care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and update my relative's care plan if their needs or health changed?
- 02What activities would be suitable for my relative, and how would you support their personal interests?
- 03How would you manage my relative's medicines, including any medicines prescribed to be taken as needed?
- 04How would you support my relative with eating and drinking if they needed a special diet or help at mealtimes?
- 05How would you involve our family in care reviews and in decisions about health or end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; inspectors also checked whether improvements had been made since the April 2017 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 October 2018 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 Winchley Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 November 2010.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.