CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Winsford Care Ltd
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Winsford House: Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, with improvements needed to PPE areas and storage security.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 4 February 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the response to coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
The home was clean and hygienic. Inspectors found suitable arrangements for testing, shielding, social distancing, visitors, admissions and managing outbreaks. Staff used PPE properly and had access to hand sanitising facilities.
Inspectors recommended improvements to areas used for putting on and removing PPE. They also said rooms storing furniture during renovations should be kept locked. The manager acted on these suggestions straight away.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give a new overall quality rating for the home.
Clean environment
The home was clean, with cleaning schedules and records showing when rooms had been cleaned. Cleaning and renovation work was also taking place.
“The environment was clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place, and there were laminated signs up in people's rooms to show when they had last been cleaned and by whom.” from the report
PPE and hand hygiene
Staff were using PPE appropriately and could access PPE and hand sanitising facilities.
“Staff were wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) appropriately and had access to PPE and hand sanitising facilities.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
Inspectors were assured that the home was accessing testing and had arrangements to prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was accessing testing for people using the service and staff.” from the report
Support for staff
Staff had access to wellbeing support, including counselling, and received risk assessments relating to increased COVID-19 risk.
“There was support for staff well-being, including the availability of unlimited counselling.” from the report
PPE areas needed improvement
minorInspectors recommended improvements to some areas used for putting on and removing PPE. The report says the manager acted on this straight away.
“Improvements to some PPE 'donning and doffing' zones were recommended during the inspection.” from the report
Storage rooms needed securing
minorRooms used to store furniture during renovation work needed to be kept locked. The report says this was highlighted during the inspection and action was taken straight away.
“We also highlighted the need to ensure rooms where furniture is stored during renovations are kept locked.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to the PPE areas after the inspection?
- 02How do you make sure rooms used to store furniture during renovations stay locked?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested, and how are the results recorded?
- 04How would you support my relative if they found self-isolation or social distancing difficult?
- 05How are visitors managed to reduce the risk of infection?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, and it did not provide a full or rated assessment of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 February 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, March 2018
Winsford House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with some management and record-keeping issues dealt with during the inspection.
Inspectors visited on 30 and 31 August and 20 December 2017. They observed care, meals and staff interactions, looked around the home, reviewed records and spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals.
The home received a Good rating overall and was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, detailed care plans and kind, respectful support.
There were some problems at the start of the inspection. Risk assessment information was not always consistent, and there had been confusion about management cover and one late notification to CQC. These issues were addressed during the inspection. The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection in June 2015.
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, privacy, communication needs and personal choices.
“We observed throughout our inspection that staff were friendly, attentive and respectful towards people.” from the report
Detailed care planning
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, routines and the support staff should provide. People and relatives were involved where possible.
“This level of detail meant that staff had the information they needed to provide care that met the person's needs and preferences in a consistent way.” from the report
Good quality checks
The manager and provider used audits, feedback and incident information to identify improvements. The report gives examples including changes to night checks and dementia training.
“Effective quality assurance systems were in place to identify areas for improvement and appropriate action to address any identified concerns.” from the report
Inconsistent risk assessment records
minorOn the first inspection day, some risk assessment information did not match people's current needs. The home updated the care plans when inspectors returned.
“For example, on the first day of inspection we found some of the information in the risk assessments was inconsistent.” from the report
Management cover and communication
needs fixingAt first, there was no deputy to lead when the registered manager was absent. This contributed to communication problems and one notification being sent late, although support for deputising was put in place during the inspection.
“There was no deputy in post at Winsford House to take the lead in her absence, which meant that there had been some issues around communication.” from the report
One late notification
needs fixingOne incident notification was not sent to CQC within the correct timescale. The report says this was a one-off linked to staff miscommunication.
“a notification about an incident had not been submitted to us at the correct time.” from the report
- 01Who deputises for the manager now, and how is the home managed when the manager is absent?
- 02How do you check that risk assessments and care plans always reflect people's current needs?
- 03What changes were made to prevent important incidents being missed or notifications being sent late?
- 04How will you support my relative's communication needs, preferences and independence?
- 05What activities and social opportunities would be available for my relative, including if they prefer quiet time?
This was a planned inspection that looked at the premises and care and assessed all five questions, using observations, records and discussions with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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 Winsford Care Ltd
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 December 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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.