CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wavelly House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe and staff were available when needed. Risk assessments, crisis plans, staffing, recruitment and medicines arrangements were found to be suitable.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and individual. Staff had the skills and training needed, and worked with health and social care professionals to support people's needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described positive relationships with staff. Inspectors found that people were treated with dignity and respect and were involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support reflected people's preferences, interests and recovery goals. Staff helped people take part in activities, use community services and communicate their views.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management systems, quality checks and a positive, person-centred culture. There was no registered manager in post, although the manager in post was applying to register.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Wavelly House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no concerns identified.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 27 March and 1 April 2019. One inspector spoke with people, a family member, the manager and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records and other records about how the home was run.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity and involved in decisions about their care. Care plans reflected people's needs, choices and goals.
The home had a friendly atmosphere and was comfortable and well maintained. Staff worked with health and social care professionals and supported people to take part in activities and live more independently. There was no registered manager at the time, but the manager in post was applying to register.
People felt safe
People consistently told inspectors they felt safe. Staff had safeguarding training and understood how to recognise and report abuse.
“People were consistently safe and protected from the risks of avoidable harm and abuse.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans and risk assessments were individual to each person. People were involved in planning their support and setting goals for greater independence.
“People had individual recovery plans which were goal based and reflected their ambitions” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found caring relationships between people and staff. People said staff respected their privacy, dignity and independence.
“People had positive relationships with staff who treated them with dignity, respect and kindness.” from the report
Activities and community links
People were supported to pursue interests inside and outside the home, including exercise, gardening, learning and preparation for work.
“Staff supported people to pursue interests in the community.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health, social care and other agencies to understand people's needs and provide joined-up support.
“The service worked collaboratively to deliver joined-up care and make sure any legal requirements relevant to people's support were met.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager at the inspection. The manager in post was applying to register, so ask who is accountable for the home while this process continues.
“There was no registered manager in post at the time of inspection.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with the manager's application to register, and who is responsible for the home until it is completed?
- 02How will staff support my relative's individual recovery goals and plans for greater independence?
- 03How are crisis plans updated, and what would staff do if my relative became distressed or showed warning signs?
- 04How will the home support my relative's communication needs, including any need for easy-read information or help with post?
- 05If my relative needed end of life care, how would this be arranged, given that the home is not set up to provide it?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with both the care provided and the premises looked at; the previous inspection had also rated the home Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 May 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.
What inspectors found, September 2016
Wavelly House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with two staff vacancies and one monitoring system awaiting repair.
This was an unannounced inspection over three days in April 2016. The inspector spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, complaints, rotas and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People said they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding, managed medicines safely and supported people to make choices. Inspectors saw kind relationships and personalised support aimed at recovery, independence and community living.
The home had two staff vacancies, but inspectors found staffing was sufficient at the time. The provider's online system for analysing incidents was temporarily offline, although other records were reviewed. The previous inspection in April 2014 found no concerns.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and trusted the staff. Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse and manage individual risks.
“Without exception people told us they felt safe living at Wavelly House and were supported by staff who they trusted.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw relaxed, positive interactions. Staff knew people's needs, preferences and personal goals and treated them with dignity.
“Staff were supportive and caring to people and had developed positive relationships with them based on mutual trust and understanding.” from the report
Personalised recovery support
People helped create their own recovery plans. These included short and long-term goals, such as work, independence and expressing feelings.
“People's support plans and assessments were person-centred, which means they were focussed on the individual, their needs and wishes.” from the report
Strong oversight
The manager used audits, feedback and improvement plans to monitor the service. Identified improvements, including refurbishment work, had been acted on.
“The registered manager operated a system of regular audits to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided and to identify and plan required improvements.” from the report
Staff vacancies
minorThere were two vacancies during the inspection. Inspectors found enough staff at the time, but families should ask how recruitment was completed and how staffing would be maintained if needs increased.
“The registered manager told us there were two staff vacancies and were in the process of completing the recruitment process to fill these.” from the report
Incident system temporarily offline
minorThe online system used to analyse incidents and identify trends was awaiting repair. The provider had other documents available, but families may wish to check that the system is now working.
“At the time of our inspection this system was offline awaiting repair by a computer engineer.” from the report
- 01Have the two staff vacancies been filled, and how do you make sure there are enough experienced staff when someone's mental health needs increase?
- 02Has the online system for analysing incidents and near misses been repaired, and how are patterns reviewed now?
- 03How would you support my relative to set and review their recovery goals, including work, activities and greater independence?
- 04How often would my relative's support plan and risk assessments be reviewed if their health or needs changed?
- 05How would you support my relative to manage medicines safely while working towards greater independence?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the service; the previous inspection on 22 April 2014 found no concerns. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 September 2016 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 Wavelly House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014Inspected but not rated
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 2010.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.