Working at Waterloo House
3 Nelson Gardens, Plymouth, PL1 5RH
Operated by Vivacare Limited
20 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
3.5/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 10 February 2026
Score: 3.5/10
Key Finding
"Staff feel valued by an amazing manager, but serious safety breaches, insufficient skilled staff, and lack of activities are major concerns."
Safety & Risk
2/10
✕
We found the provider was in breach of legal regulations in relation to safeguarding and safe care and treatment... People’s medicines were not always managed safely.
Staff Culture
6/10
✓
Staff told us '[Registered managers name]... is an amazing manager and doesn't always get the credit she deserves, she has made a huge improvement to Waterloo House and this is appreciated by staff and residents.'
Staffing Levels
3/10
✕
The provider could not be assured there were sufficient numbers of skilled staff to meet people's assessed needs... The failure to provide sufficient numbers of skilled staff... contributed to a breach of regulation in relation to staffing.
Training & Dev
3/10
✕
There were several gaps in training; there was a lack of training in relation to people’s specific health needs... records showed staff were not receiving regular supervision, and only one member of staff had received an annual appraisal.
Management
3/10
✕
The registered manager and provider did not demonstrate sufficient oversight of the service to ensure people received care and support that promoted their wellbeing and protected them from harm. This contributed to a breach of regulation in relation to good governance.
Programmes
2/10
✕
One person said, 'Sometimes I feel isolated, there are no activities here'.
Points to consider
Not enough staff with the right skills to meet residents needs, no tool to figure out proper staffing levels.
The provider could not be assured there were sufficient numbers of skilled staff to meet people's assessed needs. The registered manager provided a list of individuals they believed had additionally funded one-to-one support, but were unsure whether this was accurate.
Big safety problems like not following rules on restrictions to keep people safe and sloppy medication records.
People were not provided with care and support in line with the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards code of practice... Records relating to medicines requiring additional security were not accurate.
Gaps in training for residents specific health needs, and staff missing regular supervision or performance reviews.
There were several gaps in training; there was a lack of training in relation to people’s specific health needs... records showed staff were not receiving regular supervision, and only one member of staff had received an annual appraisal.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: September 2025
Requires improvement
Safe
!
Requires improvement
Effective
!
Requires improvement
Caring
✓
Good
Responsive
✓
Good
Management Quality
Well-led: Requires improvement
Staff Reviews
Direct feedback from current and former employees
No one has reviewed yet. Be the first.
Scan the QR code or tap the button to chat with us on WhatsApp. Your identity stays completely anonymous.
Chat on WhatsAppSources
- Care Quality Commission (CQC) Inspection Data
- PlainSight staff reviews