CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Welcome House - Gillingham Homes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found that risks, safeguarding, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff had relevant training, supported healthy eating and helped people access health professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in care decisions and supported to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's wishes and goals. People were supported with communication, activities, relationships, complaints and mental health wellbeing plans.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found committed leadership, regular meetings and audits, and a culture where people could share their views. Care notes had been identified as needing more detail.
What inspectors found, September 2022
Welcome House - Gillingham Homes was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with care notes needing more detail.
The inspection was unannounced. One inspector visited on 30 August 2022 and inspection activity continued until 6 September 2022. The inspector spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff and a social care professional. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
People told inspectors they felt safe and were supported by kind staff. The home helped people make choices, manage their own medicines, go out, keep relationships and take part in activities. Inspectors found that people's needs were assessed and reviewed, and that staff worked with health professionals when needed.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, which was published in September 2017. Inspectors noted that care notes needed more detail, and staff were working to improve them.
Supporting independence
People were encouraged to make choices and take positive risks, including holidays, going out and managing their own medicines.
“People were supported to live independent lives, and staff empowered people to take positive risks, such as going on holiday and to manage their own medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm interactions. Staff respected people's privacy, personal space and choices.
“We observed kind interactions between people and staff; the atmosphere in the service was jovial.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's wishes and goals. Staff worked at people's pace and supported individual communication needs.
“People's care plans were personalised and included their wishes and goals to guide staff on how to support them.” from the report
Good health support
People were helped to attend appointments and work with health professionals, including occupational therapists, GPs, dentists and psychiatrists.
“People had access to healthcare agencies and support including occupational therapists (OTs), GPs, dentists and psychiatrists.” from the report
People have a voice
People took part in house meetings, menu decisions, outings and interviews for potential new staff. Their views were also gathered informally.
“People were encouraged to be involved in decisions about the service.” from the report
Care notes needed more detail
minorThe management review had identified that care notes needed more detail. Staff knew about this and were working towards improvements.
“It had been identified care notes required more detail, staff were aware of this and were working towards improvements.” from the report
- 01What extra detail is being added to care notes, and how do managers check that this has improved?
- 02How are people assessed and supported to manage their own medicines safely?
- 03What support is available outside office hours, and how can residents contact staff or the provider in an emergency?
- 04How will you support my relative to keep their chosen activities, family relationships and community links?
- 05How are care plans reviewed with each person when their mental health needs or goals change?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 September 2022 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 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 August 2017. Inspectors spoke with all four people living in the home, staff and managers. They also sought information from health and social care professionals and checked care records, staff files, rotas, audits and policies.
The home provided accommodation and personal care for up to nine people with mental health needs who did not require nursing care. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems and suitable risk assessments. People had access to health professionals and support with food, activities and daily living.
People described staff as kind and respectful. Their care plans reflected their needs and preferences, and people and relatives were involved in reviews. The management team was approachable and used audits, feedback and action plans to monitor and improve the service.
The home was rated Good in every area: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found the service met the expected standards at the time of this inspection. It was the home's first rated inspection after registration in September 2016.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff with suitable skills to meet people's needs. Staffing levels were adjusted according to people's needs and occupancy.
“There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their needs.” from the report
Personal dignity
Staff knew people well and treated them with compassion and respect. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy and asking before entering bedrooms or sharing information.
“We found the staff team was committed to delivering a service that showed compassion and respect for people.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in outings, holidays, social activities, education, volunteering and leisure activities that matched their interests.
“People were supported to go on holidays, eat out and outings to the places of their choice.” from the report
Health support
People had health action plans and were supported to attend appointments. Staff sought medical advice when people's health changed.
“People received effective, timely and responsive medical treatment when their health needs changed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you support my relative to understand their mental health condition, recognise relapse triggers and develop coping strategies?
- 02How do you assess whether a person can safely manage and self-administer their medicines, and what support would be provided if this changed?
- 03What staffing levels and staff skills are in place now, including cover when someone is absent?
- 04How are changes in anxiety, behaviour or physical health identified and added to the person's care plan?
- 05How will you support my relative to take part in activities, community life and tasks that promote independence?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five quality areas and the overall service, and it was the home's first rated inspection after registration in September 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 September 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 Welcome House - Gillingham Homes
2 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Welcome House - Gillingham Homes →
- September 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Welcome House - Gillingham Homes →
- September 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 September 2016.
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.