You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 30 November 2018

Winchester House is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and personal care as a single package under a contractual agreement with the local authority, health authority or the individual, if privately funded. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Winchester House accommodates a maximum of nine older people, including people who live with dementia or a dementia related condition, in one residential style building which has been adapted for that purpose. Winchester House is a large detached house situated on a main road in a residential area of Kirby Cross, Frinton on Sea, and is close to local shops. The premises is set out on the ground floor of the building with each person using the service having their own individual bedroom and adequate communal facilities are available for people to make use of within the service. At the time of our inspection eight people were using the service.

At the last inspection in February 2018, we found multiple breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2014 and the service was rated 'Requires Improvement' overall. The registered manager sent us an action plan detailing the actions that they were going to take to make the necessary improvements. At this inspection we found the service had made all the required improvements and has now achieved an overall rating of ‘Good'.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were protected from risks relating to their physical and mental health and possible abuse. Staff had assessed individual risks to people and had taken action to seek guidance and minimise identified risks. Staff knew how to recognise possible signs of abuse.

Where accidents and incidents had taken place, these had been reviewed and action had been taken to reduce the risks of reoccurrence.

Recruitment procedures were in place to help ensure only people of good character were employed by the service. Staff underwent Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS criminal record) checks before they started work.

Staffing numbers at the service were sufficient to meet people's needs. Staff received regular supervision and appraisal.

Staff supported people to take their medicines safely and staffs' knowledge relating to the administration of medicines was regularly checked.

Staff received thorough training in all areas relating to people's individual health needs and holistic activities. Staff also received support from external healthcare professionals about how to best care for people.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and put this into practice. People were involved in all aspects of their care and were supported by staff to communicate their wishes, likes, dislikes and decisions. People were supported through the use of verbal communication, pictorial forms and accessible communication formats.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink in ways that met their needs and preferences. Meal times were social events and people were supported to ensure their specific needs around food and drink were met.

Staff demonstrated to us they cared strongly about people's wellbeing in every aspect of their lives and worked towards improving each person's happiness and wellbeing. Staff promoted people's equality, diversity and ensured their human rights were upheld. Staff spoke confidently to us about how they upheld people's rights and gave us examples which demonstrated they put people's individuality and personal wishes first.

Staff treated people with respect and kindness. There was a

Inspection areas



Updated 30 November 2018

The service was safe.

The provider had effective systems in place to assess risk and make plans to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities in safeguarding people.

There were sufficient staff that had been recruited safely, to keep people safe and meet people's needs promptly.

People received their medication at the right time and good medicines management processes were in place.



Updated 30 November 2018

The service was effective.

Staff worked well together to deliver personalised support.

People's needs were met by well trained and skilled staff. and were supported to make decisions and choices about their care.

People's healthcare needs were met and promoted. People were supported to eat and drink appropriately.



Updated 30 November 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff who were caring and had developed positive warm relationships with people in the service.

People were satisfied with the care being provided.

People were involved in making decisions about their care supported to develop their independence.

Staff gave due consideration to equality and diversity of people and treated them with dignity and respect.



Updated 30 November 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans reflected the current needs of people.

People and staff told us activities took place for people at the service and these were flexible and people could choose what to take part in as the service was small.

People received individualised care to enable them to be as independent as possible.

There was a complaints procedure in place. People we spoke with told us they had no complaints.

People received compassionate end of life care.



Updated 30 November 2018

The service was well-led.

A series of quality checks were in place and were carried out to identify where improvements were required. Their findings were used to improve the safety of the care delivered and outcomes for people.

Staff told us they were well supported by the registered manager, and they understood their roles and responsibilities.

The registered manager had good oversight of the service.

People and relatives told us they could approach the registered manager if they wished to do so.