CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Woking Homes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 infection controls, but some policies and risk assessments were out of date.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors found good arrangements for safe visiting, including a separate visiting room, cleaning after each visit, PPE, testing and screens where needed. Staff worked only at the home, and facilities were changed to support infection control.
The home had enough PPE and testing kits. Staff understood how to care for people self-isolating and were kept updated about changing guidance.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating. Inspectors were somewhat assured that the infection control policy was up to date because some guidance was missing, although the management reviewed the policy and refreshed an audit.
Safer visiting
The home provided a separate visiting room and used cleaning, PPE, testing, screens and individual risk assessments where needed.
“People were supported to host visitors in a COVID-19 secure way.” from the report
PPE and testing
Inspectors found adequate supplies of PPE and testing kits. Staff had guidance about using them safely.
“There were adequate supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) and testing kits available in the home.” from the report
Written guidance was incomplete
needs fixingSome recent guidance about COVID-19 testing and good ventilation was missing from the latest policies and infection control risk assessments. Inspectors also said the infection control audit findings needed updating.
“some areas of the guidance such as changes to the national COVID-19 testing program and the importance of good ventilation of the premises were not included in the latest version of the service policies and IPC risk assessments.” from the report
- 01Have the infection prevention and control policies been updated to include the latest testing guidance?
- 02How is good ventilation checked and recorded in the home?
- 03Has the infection prevention and control audit been refreshed, and can we see the latest findings?
- 04How are visiting arrangements and individual visiting risk assessments managed now?
- 05How are staff kept informed when infection control guidance changes?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide an overall or full set of service ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 April 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, February 2019
Woking Homes was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and checks needing improvement.
This was a planned inspection over 23 and 30 January 2019. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines, recruitment, training, the building and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and happy. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, caring relationships, personalised care plans and a good range of activities.
Inspectors identified some points for improvement. These included bedroom safety checks, occasional use of agency staff, unclear records about mental capacity, daily visual meal choices and two missed notifications to CQC. The overall Good rating continued from the previous inspection in August 2016.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe and confident in the care provided.
“People told us they felt safe and happy.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm relationships between staff and people. Staff supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded individual needs, preferences, beliefs, abilities and ways of communicating. Plans were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“People had individual care plans that provided staff with up to date information about their needs and abilities, associated risks, preferences for support and background history.” from the report
Activities and social contact
People could join varied activities, follow their interests and go on outings. Activities were also provided for people living with dementia.
“Activities were available every day and planned by the activities co-ordinator and people using the service.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Inspectors found medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Staff training and competency checks were in place.
“All medicines were managed safely and in line with national guidance.” from the report
Bedroom safety checks
needs fixingBedroom checks covered cleanliness and repairs but did not check for obstacles, hazards or working call bells. Management agreed to add these checks.
“We noted checks did not consider the safety of people's bedrooms and potential hazards.” from the report
Use of agency staff
needs fixingTwo people said agency staff did not know them as well, which sometimes affected their experience. The manager was recruiting permanent staff.
“Two people felt the use of agency staff sometimes affected their experience of care as these staff did not know them so well.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingTwo care records did not clearly show whether people had capacity to make decisions or needed an assessment. The manager agreed to review all care plans.
“In two instances, records were not clear whether the person had capacity to make decisions and if a mental capacity assessment was needed.” from the report
Visual meal choices
minorPhotos of meals were available for people who could not communicate choices verbally, but they were not displayed every day. The manager agreed to address this.
“For people who could not communicate their choices verbally, photos of meals were available although these were not displayed daily.” from the report
Missed CQC notifications
needs fixingTwo recent safeguarding concerns had initially been reported to the local authority but not CQC. The manager completed the relevant CQC forms during the inspection.
“Notifications had been submitted appropriately aside from two recent safeguarding concerns, which were raised directly with the local authority.” from the report
- 01What has changed in the monthly bedroom checks, and how do you confirm that call bells are working?
- 02How many permanent staff are now employed, and how do you keep care consistent when agency staff are used?
- 03How are mental capacity assessments recorded and reviewed for people who may need them?
- 04How do you provide daily visual meal choices for people who cannot communicate verbally?
- 05How do you make sure safeguarding incidents are notified to CQC as well as the local authority?
This was a planned inspection of all five key questions, with the first day unannounced; the previous overall rating was Good in August 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 February 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 Woking Homes
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.