Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Wantsum Lodge

Goodpublished 26 March 2019, 7 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, good infection control and medicines that were stored and managed safely.
Effective?
Good
People's needs and choices were assessed, and staff had suitable training and skills. The home worked with health professionals and supported people's nutrition and legal rights.
Caring?
Good
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well, involved them in decisions and supported their independence.
Responsive?
Good
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and routines and were reviewed regularly. People and relatives knew how to complain, and earlier complaints had been investigated and resolved.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found open leadership, regular checks and a focus on improving care. There was no registered manager in post, but the deputy manager had completed the registration paperwork and was waiting for an interview date.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, March 2019

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some medicine records needing close checking.

This was a planned comprehensive inspection on 6 and 7 February 2019. Two inspectors and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files, training records and management information.

The home was supporting 38 people. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, good infection control and safe medicine storage. People were treated with kindness, involved in their care and supported to remain as independent as possible.

All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection on 7 July 2016, so this inspection found that the rating had been maintained.

What inspectors praised
  • People felt safe

    People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood how to recognise and report abuse. Risks such as falls, skin damage and pressure sores were assessed and managed.

    “People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Legal requirements were met.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    Staff knew people well and treated them with compassion. Inspectors saw staff respect privacy, involve people in choices and encourage independence.

    “People were treated with kindness and compassion in their day-to-day care.” from the report
  • Personalised support

    Care plans reflected people's routines, preferences and abilities. People were involved in reviews and received support based on their individual needs.

    “People received support which was based around their needs, choices and preferences.” from the report
  • Staff had appropriate skills

    Staff received induction, ongoing training and specialist training where people had particular health conditions. The home also worked with health professionals when people's needs changed.

    “People were supported by staff who had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Medicine records were not always accurate

    needs fixing

    The home had identified that staff did not always complete medicine records correctly. Senior management carried out competency checks, and the deputy manager checked records each morning to deal with errors.

    “They had identified staff were not always completing medicine records accurately.” from the report
  • No registered manager in post

    minor

    There was no registered manager at the time of the inspection. The deputy manager had applied to register with CQC and was waiting for an interview date.

    “There wasn't a registered manager in post but the deputy manager had completed paperwork to register with CQC and was waiting for an interview date.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How are medicine administration records checked now, and what happens if an error is found?
  2. 02Has the deputy manager since become the registered manager with CQC?
  3. 03How will you assess and respond if my relative's health or mobility needs change?
  4. 04How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing the care plan?
  5. 05What activities and support are currently available to help residents remain independent?

This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led; all five ratings were Good and the previous rating from 7 July 2016 was also Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 March 2019 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Wantsum Lodge

2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. March 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Wantsum Lodge →

  2. July 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. July 2013

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 July 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

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.”
Anthea D., about Theresa L.
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
Winnie N., about Irene N.
See live-in carers near KentProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.