Rated Care Homes

Vitality Plus Care Ltd

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 2 ratings

    Rated Requires improvement at every inspection since 2023.

  • 6 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 9 of 98

    rated home care services in Wiltshire are rated Requires improvement, like this one.

Vitality Plus Care Ltd: inspection record

Home care, Wiltshire

Rated Requires improvement in April 2026.

Vitality Plus Care Ltd: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Brandon Trust Supported Living - Wiltshire (Good, less than 0.1 miles away) and C&S Makenston Special Care Service (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest home care services:

  1. G
    Brandon Trust Supported Living - Wiltshire Good, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    ELSI (SW) LTD No overall rating, less than 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    C&S Makenston Special Care Service Good, 0.1 miles away
  4. –
    South West Care Services Not yet rated, 0.1 miles away
  5. G
    Caring Partners Healthcare Ltd Good, 0.1 miles away

See all home care services in Wiltshire

See all home care services in Trowbridge

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 30 April 2026 (assessment visit 18 February 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of assessment: 23 February to 30 March 2026.

The service provides personal care support to adults and people with a learning disability in their own home. At the time of the assessment the service was supporting 34 people with a regulated activity. This assessment was carried out in response to the rating of requires improvement at the last assessment and due to safeguarding concerns, we received about the service.

  • Safe No rating
  • Effective Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

At the time of the assessment there were no people using the service who had a learning disability. As a result, we were not able to assess the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

The service had still not fully implemented an effective system to manage the governance of the service, and we still identified some shortfalls. For example, we still saw some care plans and risk assessment had incomplete, inconsistence or missing information. This meant staff did not always have clear and accurate guidance to deliver safe and consistent care. Assessments of individuals’ needs were still not always reflected clearly or comprehensively in care plans. This meant care planning did not always provide a reliable picture of the support people required. Some documentation in relation to medicines was also still not completed comprehensively. This meant there was a risk that medicines may not always be managed safely.

Safe recruitment practices had improved but were still not always being completed in line with the provider’s policy and legislation. This meant staff employed may not be suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Mental Capacity Assessments (MCAs), required under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, were not being completed for people who may lack capacity. This meant decisions about their care may not have been made lawfully or in their best interests.

We found no evidence that people had come to harm because of these shortfalls.

However, new quality systems had been added since the last inspection to strengthen the oversight of risk and performance.We now saw recent audits had identified the need to further review assessments, care plans and risk assessments to ensure they were effective. A service improvement plan was in place, and the registered manager was progressing through the required actions. The provider was now notifying statutory agencies in line with their regulatory responsibilities.

Staff told us they felt supported by the service’s leadership and demonstrated an understanding of their roles and responsibilities when supporting people with a range of needs. Staff had also received appropriate training for their roles. There was a shared vision and culture within the service, and leaders demonstrated openness, honesty and transparency.

The service had made some improvements and were no longer in breach of safe care and treatment, failure to send notifications and staff being recruited safely.

We identified one breach of the legal requirement in relation to governance.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement.

    This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

    This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

    This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  4. Well-led

    No rating

    Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the remained requires improvement.

    This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

    The service was in continued breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service.

Questions to ask the service

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 30 April 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 30 April 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  3. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.

Registration details

Registered manager
Sharon Chipungu
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Domiciliary care service
Who it supports
Dementia, Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, Older People, Physical Disability, Younger Adults

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

1 inspection report, latest 27 May 2023. Latest assessment published 30 April 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
13532564 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Wiltshire Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Vitality Plus Care Ltd provide nursing care?
The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Vitality Plus Care Ltd.
When was Vitality Plus Care Ltd last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Vitality Plus Care Ltd was published on 30 April 2026.
Who runs Vitality Plus Care Ltd?
Vitality Plus Care Ltd is run by Vitality Plus Care Ltd.
What is Vitality Plus Care Ltd's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 30 April 2026.

Contact

Phone
07927 096968
Address
Unit 5, Kestrel House, 7 Mill Street, Trowbridge, BA14 8BE Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Brandon Trust Supported Living - Wiltshire (Good, less than 0.1 miles away) and C&S Makenston Special Care Service (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest home care services:

  1. G
    Brandon Trust Supported Living - Wiltshire Good, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    ELSI (SW) LTD No overall rating, less than 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    C&S Makenston Special Care Service Good, 0.1 miles away
  4. –
    South West Care Services Not yet rated, 0.1 miles away
  5. G
    Caring Partners Healthcare Ltd Good, 0.1 miles away

See all home care services in Wiltshire

See all home care services in Trowbridge