CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Wisteria Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were managed through testing, isolation, PPE, cleaning, social distancing and an up-to-date infection control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured the home managed its COVID-19 outbreak and infection controls safely.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 20 January 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, carried out regular testing, followed social distancing rules and had enough cleaning supplies. They also found that people who tested positive were isolated in their own rooms.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or ratings for all five areas of care.
Outbreak management
Inspectors found that the recent COVID-19 outbreak had been managed in line with the home's policy and current good practice guidance.
“A recent outbreak of COVID-19 was well managed.” from the report
Testing and isolation
People living in the home and staff received regular COVID-19 testing. People who tested positive were isolated in rooms with ensuite facilities.
“People who lived at Wisteria Lodge and staff underwent regular COVID-19 testing, in line with government guidance.” from the report
PPE and cleaning
There were enough PPE and cleaning materials, and staff used enhanced cleaning schedules. PPE stations were available throughout the home.
“There were sufficient stocks of appropriate PPE and cleaning materials and we saw staff followed enhanced cleaning schedules.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends through video calls, telephone calls and emails. A visiting pod was planned for visits when safe.
“People were supported to maintain contact with family and friends through video calls, telephone calls and emails.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people and staff tested for COVID-19 now, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 02How are visits currently arranged, and is the designated visiting pod still being used?
- 03How often are PPE supplies and cleaning materials checked?
- 04How do you make sure staff keep following their infection prevention and control training?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last updated?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during a COVID-19 outbreak; it did not rate the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 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, May 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some recording and new-system issues being addressed.
This was a planned, unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 8 and 22 January 2019. Inspectors reviewed information held about the home, spoke with 11 people, five care staff and two relatives, and examined care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, staff were kind and respectful, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Inspectors also found good support with food, health care, consent and personalised care.
Inspectors found some issues while the home was moving from paper to electronic records, and while changing pharmacy systems. They also identified some infection control practices that could be improved. Management addressed the matters identified by the second inspection day. The home was last inspected in July 2016 and was also rated Good.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe and had no concerns about safety. Inspectors found safeguarding training, risk assessments and safe equipment arrangements.
“People felt safe and no one had any concerns around safety issues.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated as individuals and involved in decisions about their care. Staff knew people well and respected their privacy.
“We observed people were treated with dignity and respect by a consistent staff team who knew them very well.” from the report
Food and health support
The home provided meals suited to people's dietary needs, offered choices and monitored people's weight. Staff made appropriate health referrals when needed.
“Staff supported people to receive meals which met their dietary requirements and assessed needs.” from the report
Positive leadership
Inspectors found clear management plans, supportive leadership and positive morale among staff. The home worked with health and social care professionals.
“The service was consistently managed and well-led.” from the report
Electronic care records
needs fixingThe move to electronic records caused some problems with how information was recorded and how it informed staff about people's care. Management identified and addressed the issues found during the inspection.
“There were some lessons to be learnt in this process that management were addressing.” from the report
Infection control practices
minorInspectors found some practices that could increase the risk of cross infection. Management acted by the second inspection day to reduce the risks.
“On the first day of the inspection we noted some practices where improvements could be made to reduce the risk of cross infection in the home.” from the report
- 01Have the electronic care records been fully settled, and how do you check that staff have the information they need?
- 02What changes were made to the pharmacy system after the medicines anomalies and queries found during the inspection?
- 03What infection control practices were changed after the first inspection day, and how are they checked now?
- 04How was the change from the registered manager to the new manager completed?
- 05How do you make sure care plans continue to reflect each person's current needs and preferences?
This was a planned, unannounced, comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; each question was rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 May 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 Wisteria Lodge
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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
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.