Rated Care Homes

Vitale Care Chichester

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 1 rating

    Only one rating on record, so there is no trend to show yet.

  • 7 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 125 of 138

    rated home care services in West Sussex are rated Good, like this one.

Vitale Care Chichester: inspection record

Home care, West Sussex

Rated Good in March 2026.

Vitale Care Chichester: 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

  1. G
    Avoston Ltd Good, 1.7 miles away
  2. G
    Choice Care 4 U Services Ltd Good, 1.7 miles away
  3. G
    Angelica Care Ltd Good, 2.3 miles away
  4. G
    London Care (Lapwing Court) Good, 2.5 miles away
  5. G

See all home care services in West Sussex

See all home care services in Selsey

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 3 March 2026 (assessment visit 25 January 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of Assessment: 7 February 2026 to 11 February 2026. This inspection was completed remotely. There was a registered manager in post at the time of inspection. The service is a care at home service providing support to adults with physical and sensory disabilities and dementia. At the time of our inspection 47 people were in receipt of the regulated activity personal care.The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates the personal care and support that people may receive. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

Care staff knew people well and supported them with dignity, compassion and patience. The provider had effective systems to keep people safe. Safeguarding concerns were reported promptly and worked through with the local authority. Internal investigations were completed where needed, and actions were taken to reduce the risk of re‑occurrence. People told us they felt safe with staff, and relatives spoke highly of the provider’s responsiveness and communication. Medicines were managed safely, with audits showing administration was accurate and aligned to people’s needs. Where digital records were incomplete, managers followed up quickly and there was no evidence of harm.

People experienced care that was personalised and responsive to their changing needs. Care plans were detailed, person‑centred and reflected people’s preferences, strengths and goals. For people with complex needs, such as neurological conditions, brain injury or significant physical disabilities, risk assessments were thorough and regularly reviewed. Staff understood how to support people safely, including for needs such as hoisting, mobility, dysphagia, (swallowing difficulties) and catheter care. People were supported to maintain independence wherever possible.

Staffing levels were safe and well managed. People and staff told us rotas were stable and communication from the office was good. Visit punctuality was monitored daily and there were no missed visits. Travel time gaps were identified within rota patterns and managers were reviewing these to ensure consistency and fairness for both staff and people.

Leadership was visible, approachable and focused on improving outcomes. Staff told us they felt supported, valued and confident to raise concerns. A clear culture of learning was evident through regular audits, a comprehensive quality improvement plan and reflective actions following incidents. The provider had strong links with the local community, supporting groups and initiatives that benefitted people’s wellbeing and reduced isolation.

The service demonstrated a positive, caring culture, strong safeguarding practice and a clear commitment to person‑centred care.

  1. Safe

    Good

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

    This is the first inspection for this service. At this inspection this key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  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.

    This is the first inspection for this service. At this inspection this key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

    This is the first inspection for this service. At this inspection this key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

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

    This is the first inspection for this service. At this inspection this key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    Good

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

    This is the first inspection for this service. At this inspection this key question has been rated good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask the service

  1. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.
  2. Ask how visit times are agreed and who covers when your usual carer is away.

Registration details

Registered manager
Nicola Munday
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Domiciliary care service
Who it supports
Whole Population

Inspection report

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

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
14274387 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from West Sussex County 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 Vitale Care Chichester provide nursing care?
The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Vitale Care Chichester.
When was Vitale Care Chichester last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Vitale Care Chichester was published on 3 March 2026.
Who runs Vitale Care Chichester?
Vitale Care Chichester is run by Vitale Care Limited.
What is Vitale Care Chichester's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 3 March 2026.