CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Country Court Care
Walberton Place Care Home
Yapton Lane, Walberton, Arundel, BN18 0AS
Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2024
Rated Inadequate and placed in special measures; inspectors found serious safety, safeguarding and leadership failures.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 11 October 2023. Four inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff records, rotas, training and management records.
The home was rated Inadequate for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were not consistently assessed or managed. Medicines records were unclear, infection control was not properly reviewed, and people were not always protected from improper treatment or neglect.
Staff did not always have the skills needed for people's needs. Management checks had failed to find or fix problems, and improvements had not been sustained. People and relatives did describe care staff as kind and caring, and recruitment checks were in place.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, published in June 2023. The home had been rated Requires Improvement at the previous four inspections and was still in breach of regulations. It is now in special measures while CQC monitors whether significant improvements are made.
Kind and caring staff
People and relatives said care staff were kind and caring, although there were concerns about communication.
“People and their relatives told us the care staff were kind and caring but there were concerns about communication at the home.” from the report
Recruitment checks
The home had checks in place before staff were employed, including references and DBS checks.
“The provider had safe systems in place for recruiting staff.” from the report
Mental capacity processes
Mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were recorded, and deprivation of liberty authorisations were monitored.
“The provider was working in line with the Mental Capacity Act.” from the report
Visitors allowed
People could receive visitors without restrictions, in line with the guidance referred to in the report.
“People were able to receive visitors without restrictions in line with best practice guidance.” from the report
Risks not managed
seriousRisk assessments and care plans did not always give staff the information needed to keep people safe. Inspectors observed unsafe support for a person at high risk of choking.
“The provider did not always assess risks to ensure people were safe.” from the report
Medicines errors
seriousPRN instructions were not always followed, records were unclear, and medicine stock records contained errors. One person's pain relief was not recorded in their care plan or administration records.
“Some PRN protocols were not being consistently followed by staff and medicine administration record (MAR) charts were not clear.” from the report
Safeguarding failures
seriousInspectors raised safeguarding alerts for two people. Some incidents had not been identified or reported as possible safeguarding concerns, and staff could not always explain how they would recognise abuse.
“People were not always protected from abuse and improper treatment.” from the report
Infection control
seriousDuring a COVID-19 outbreak, not all staff wore masks and some were unsure about personal protective equipment. The manager had not reviewed the infection control risk assessment or current guidance.
“People were not always protected from the risk of infection as staff were not consistently following safe infection prevention and control practices” from the report
Staff skills
seriousStaff did not always have the skills or confidence to manage people's needs, including allergies, falls, catheter care and additional support needs.
“The provider had not ensured all staff had the skills and competence to provide care safely.” from the report
Weak oversight
seriousAudits did not identify inaccurate records, missing care information or medicine discrepancies. Repeated action plans had not reduced problems such as falls or embedded learning.
“There had been a continued failure to make, and sustain, improvements over time.” from the report
- 01What immediate changes have been made to risk assessments and care plans for choking, hydration, epilepsy, falls, dementia and end of life care?
- 02How are PRN medicines, pain relief, medicine stocks and MAR charts now checked for accuracy?
- 03What safeguarding concerns were identified, reported and investigated, and how will you prevent similar incidents?
- 04What training and competency checks have staff completed for the needs of people currently living in the home?
- 05What evidence can you show that audits and the improvement plan are now identifying problems and making changes that last?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key question ratings were carried over from the previous inspection and used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 February 2024 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 Walberton Place Care Home
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Requires improvement to Inadequate.
- February 2024Inadequatecurrent ratingdown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2023Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2022Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 2019.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.
Or stay at home with a private carer
Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.
Other services run by Country Court Care Homes 2 Limited
18 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.