CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wallfield
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with a small medicines-records issue and some reliance on agency staff.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 29 and 30 May 2018. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors spoke with people, staff and the manager, observed care, and checked care records, staff files, complaints, medicines and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were described as safe, respected and involved in decisions about their care. Inspectors found a friendly, homely service with activities, community links and support tailored to each person.
There were enough staff at the inspection, but the home had five vacancies and used relief and agency staff to cover gaps. Inspectors also recommended reviewing the checking and countersigning of handwritten medicines records. This was a recommendation, not a regulatory breach.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed compassionate care throughout the visit. People knew staff well and felt comfortable approaching them.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion, and their privacy and dignity was upheld.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans covered people's needs, preferences, goals and life histories. Staff supported people to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“Comprehensive, up-to-date support plans were individualised to the person according to their needs and preferences.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People chose activities and outings that matched their interests. They were also supported to take part in everyday tasks such as laundry and cleaning their rooms.
“There was a strong sense of people getting on with their daily lives and staff supporting them to do so, rather than people fitting into routines determined by staff.” from the report
Good leadership and checks
Staff described managers as supportive and approachable. The provider used audits and action plans to monitor and improve the service.
“The provider had quality assurance processes in place, which helped to maintain standards and drive improvement.” from the report
Handwritten medicines records
needs fixingSome handwritten medicines administration records had not been checked and countersigned as required, although the instructions were correct. Inspectors recommended reviewing the process.
“However, some had not been countersigned as they should have been, although the instructions were correct.” from the report
Staff vacancies and agency cover
minorThe home had five staff vacancies and relied on relief and agency workers to cover rota gaps. Inspectors said staffing was sufficient during the inspection, but families should ask whether this remains the position.
“There were sufficient staff on duty to support people to stay safe and meet their needs, although the service relied on relief and agency staff to cover gaps in the rota” from the report
- 01How many permanent staff vacancies are there now, and how often are relief or agency staff used?
- 02What action was taken to ensure every handwritten medicines record is checked and countersigned?
- 03How do you make sure agency staff know each person's communication needs, risks and preferences?
- 04How are people and their families involved in reviewing personalised support plans?
- 05What activities and community outings are currently available for someone with my relative's interests?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering the overall service and all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 July 2018 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 Wallfield
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 July 2015.
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
37 live-in carers within about an hour of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
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 £1,000 to £1,340 a week. 26 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“We could not have managed without her calm, reassuring presence and practical knowledge and skill in caring and supporting both my husband and the family and I.”
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
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.