CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Insight Walderslade
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- People's individual risks were assessed and medicines and staffing were managed safely. However, emergency plans did not explain how care would continue after a major incident, and incident reporting to external bodies was not always clear.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the skills and training to support people with learning disabilities, autism and complex behaviours. People received support with healthcare, food, drink and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors found kind and respectful relationships between staff and people. People were involved in care planning, supported to make choices and encouraged to be independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was based on individual assessments and was updated with people's involvement. Staff supported personalised activities, community participation and changes in people's health or behaviour.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had stable management, regular audits and clear systems for reviewing care, risks and staff performance. People and staff were asked for their views, and staff described managers as approachable.
What inspectors found, July 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but the Safe rating requires improvement because emergency planning and incident reporting were not always clear.
This was an announced inspection on 5 May 2017. One inspector spoke with people, staff and the local authority, observed care, and checked care files, medicines records, staff files, training, rotas, complaints and incident records.
People were supported by trained staff who knew them well. Inspectors found respectful and compassionate care, good support with health needs, flexible activities, and care plans that reflected people's choices and changing needs.
The main weaknesses were in safety systems. The emergency policy did not explain how care would continue after a major incident, such as a fire or loss of power or water. The home had also not always considered whether incidents needed to be reported to the CQC.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement. The previous inspection on 25 May 2015 found that the home met the relevant standards.
Kind, individual care
Staff knew people's preferences and treated them with dignity. People were involved in decisions about their care and daily routines.
“People were treated as individuals, able to make choices about their care.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received specialist training and understood how to support people with complex needs and behaviours that could put people at risk.
“Staff had the skills and training to support people to participate as equals in their community, living within an ordinary home.” from the report
Health support
People were helped to access GPs and other professionals. Staff had information and training to support conditions including epilepsy and diabetes.
“People had access to GPs and their health and wellbeing was supported by prompt referrals and access to medical care if they became unwell.” from the report
Choice and community life
People could choose activities, change their minds and personalise their bedrooms. Staff supported people to take part in community activities and develop independence.
“People could change their minds and told us they did not have to do their chosen activity.” from the report
Open management
The manager used audits, meetings and surveys to review the service. Staff said they were listened to and supported by the management team.
“The registered manager had carried out quality audits of the service on a monthly basis.” from the report
Emergency planning
needs fixingThe emergency policy was generic and did not explain how people would continue to receive safe care if the home had to be evacuated and could not be re-entered.
“The providers policy and local arrangements did not enable staff to respond and manage major incidents and emergency situations.” from the report
Incident reporting
needs fixingManagers did not always clearly consider whether incidents needed to be reported to the CQC. This included an incident involving police and incidents of verbal aggression affecting other people.
“the registered manager had not always considered if the incidents were still notifiable to the Care Quality Commission (CQC).” from the report
- 01What specific emergency plan is now in place if the home has to close after a fire, flood, or loss of power or water?
- 02How do you decide whether an incident must be reported to the CQC or safeguarding teams?
- 03What action was taken after the incident involving police and the incidents of verbal aggression mentioned in the report?
- 04How will you make sure staff continue to receive specialist training for behaviours that may harm people?
- 05How will my relative be involved in choosing activities, reviewing their care plan and making decisions about daily routines?
This was an announced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with observations, discussions and checks of care, staff, medicines, incident and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 July 2017 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 Insight Walderslade
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 March 2013.
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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Medway
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. 78 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.