CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Walmer Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including visitors, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements during a targeted Covid-19 inspection.
Inspectors visited the home on 11 March 2021. The visit was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control during the Covid-19 pandemic.
They found that visitors were managed safely, new residents had testing and isolation arrangements, and staff had enough protective equipment. The home also had cleaning schedules, infection-control audits and up-to-date policies.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for the other areas of care.
Safer visiting
Visiting was by appointment, and a visitor pod allowed window visits without visitors entering the home.
“A visitor pod outside the service had been created to enable window visits to be completed in safety and comfort.” from the report
Family contact
Staff helped residents send video messages, and relatives received regular updates about developments and Covid-19 safety.
“Staff helped people to send video messages to their family members. Relatives also received a regular newsletter from the registered manager.” from the report
Safer admissions
New residents had a negative Covid-19 test, a 14-day isolation period and health monitoring during and after isolation.
“A negative test for Covid-19 and a 14-day isolation period were in place.” from the report
Clean environment and supplies
Inspectors found the home clean and found that personal protective equipment was available and used correctly.
“There was enough personal protective equipment for staff and visitors and this was being used in the right way.” from the report
Infection-control planning
The home had current infection-control policies and carried out regular audits, with actions followed up when needed.
“The service had up-to-date infection control policies including those specific to managing risks related to Covid-19 and infection outbreaks.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current arrangements for visiting, including whether visits are by appointment and where they take place?
- 02How are new residents tested, isolated and monitored for symptoms when they move in?
- 03How often are infection-control audits carried out, and what actions have been taken since the inspection?
- 04How is personal protective equipment supplied and checked for staff and visitors?
- 05What is the current plan for managing an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not provide ratings for the other areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 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, April 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some medicines records not completed accurately.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 22 February 2018. One inspector and an Expert by Experience reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files, training records, meetings and quality checks. They also observed care, spoke with all the people living there, four relatives and staff, and received feedback from a community health professional.
The home provided care for up to 37 older people with dementia, with 29 people living there at the inspection. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable care plans, clean premises and safe medicines systems. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, keep relationships and take part in activities.
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors found that staff knew people well, respected their privacy and responded to changes in their needs. The home also supported people's health, nutrition, appointments and end-of-life wishes.
The overall rating was Good, and each of the five areas was rated Good. This means the inspection found the service met the expected standards overall. The rating had not changed since the previous inspection.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. There was a stable group of staff who knew people well.
“There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people's needs. There was a stable group of staff that knew people well.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were patient, friendly and attentive. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy, using people's preferred names and helping people remain independent.
“There was a mutual respect between staff and people. Staff spoke to people in a discreet and caring way, using people's preferred names.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's life history, preferences and routines. Staff changed their support when people's needs changed.
“Care plans contained information about the person's life before they came to live in the service and what was important to them.” from the report
Good management oversight
The home used audits, meetings, surveys and action plans to monitor quality and make improvements. People, relatives and staff described an open culture.
“When any shortfalls were identified an action plan was put in place with who was responsible for completing the plan and by what date.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSeveral medicines records were missing signatures from one staff member. Inspectors said people had received their medicines, but the records were not accurate. The home removed the staff member from giving medicines and arranged further training.
“People had received the medicines, but this had not been recorded accurately.” from the report
- 01What checks now make sure every medicine given is recorded and signed correctly?
- 02How will you find out and record my relative's routines, history, preferences and personal interests?
- 03How do you support people with dementia to make choices and remain as independent as possible?
- 04What activities would be suitable for my relative, and how can they choose whether to take part?
- 05How would you discuss and record my relative's wishes for end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the ratings in all five areas remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 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 Walmer Care Centre
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 January 2011.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.