You are here

Wessex House Requires improvement

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 17 September 2019

About the service

Wessex House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 47 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 56 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they were happy living at Wessex House and that they felt safe. However, we found that people had been put at potential risk of harm due to pressure relieving mattresses not being checked to ensure they were at the right setting for the person’s weight. We also observed thickening agents left on a sideboard un-observed and stored in people’s wardrobes. This placed people at risk of harm because, the powder used to thicken fluids had the potential to cause a person to choke if they ate it. The systems to check the safety and quality of the service had not been effective in identifying these risks. When we mentioned this to the registered manager they took immediate action to rectify the shortfalls and ensure people were safe.

There were mixed comments on staffing levels, some people said there were enough staff whilst others said, “Staff are rushed of their feet,” and “Sometimes you have to wait as there are not enough staff around.” The registered manager aimed to provide 10% more staff than the numbers recommended by the dependency staffing tool they used to determine staffing levels.

People received effective care from staff who were well trained and demonstrated a good knowledge of people’s needs, likes and dislikes.

People enjoyed a healthy balanced and nutritious diet based on their preferences and health needs. However, the dining experienced differed for people on different floors. On one floor staff sat with people and made the lunchtime a social occasion whilst on the upper floor people experienced a task orientated approach to support around serving and assisting with eating.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People received care from staff who were kind and caring. Staff always respected people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff encouraged people to be involved in their care planning and reviews. People were supported to express an opinion about the care provided and were involved in the day to day running of the home.

People received responsive care and support which was personalised to their individual needs and wishes and promoted independence. There was clear guidance for staff on how to support people in line with their personal wishes. However, people’s specific end of life wishes were not recorded in a person centred way.

People were supported by a team that was well led. The registered manager demonstrated an open and positive approach to learning and development. Everybody spoken with said they felt the registered manager was open, approachable and they could see them around the home most days. Staff said they felt they were valued and well supported. They told us they felt their ideas were listened to when they had a suggestion about working practices in the home.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, ensure staff kept up to date with good practice and to seek people’s views. Records showed the service responded to concerns and complaints and learnt from the issues raised.

The registered manager responded promptly to shortfalls raised during the inspection and took immediate action to improve outcomes for people. Following the inspection, the registered manager showed us evidence that all shortfalls discussed had been rectified and systems were in place to prevent them reoccurring.

We have identified one breach in relation to Regulation 12 (Safe Care and Treatment) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 at this inspection.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 13 February 2017).

Follow up

We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 17 September 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 17 September 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 17 September 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 17 September 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 17 September 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.