• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Versita Care Ltd

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

118 Roman Road, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG23 8HF 07727 667369

Provided and run by:
VERSITA CARE LTD

Assessment report published 15 December 2025

Ratings

  • Overall

    Good

  • Safe

    Good

  • Effective

    Good

  • Caring

    Good

  • Responsive

    Good

  • Well-led

    Good

Our view of the service

Date of inspection: 24 November to 05 December 2025.

Versita Care Ltd is a supported living service. Not everyone who used the supported living service was receiving the regulated activity of personal care. We only reviewed the care and support for people who were receiving the regulated activity. The service can provide support to people with a mental health condition, people with a learning disability, children aged 0-18 and adults aged under 65.

We carried out this responsive inspection of 10 quality statements from the key questions of effective, responsive and well-led. In order to check if the provider had met the requirements of the warning notice served following our inspection in January 2025 in relation to a breach of regulation 17 good governance. We also checked to see if the provider had met their action plan for the breach of regulation 11 need for consent. We found at this assessment the required improvements had been made, and the service was no longer in breach of regulations.

We assessed 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.

People’s care needs were assessed, and their care was planned to meet their individual needs. People’s care was reviewed regularly, to ensure it remained relevant. People's consent for their care was sought and where they lacked the capacity to consent to specific decisions, legal requirements were met. Staff worked with professionals and relevant others to identify what was in people’s best interests. People were provided with relevant information about their care needs in formats which were suitable for their needs.

People received continuity of care from regular staff who had undertaken relevant training to be able to support people effectively. The provider and staff were alert to the impact of people’s previous experiences upon them and worked to provide them with equity of access and outcomes.

There were clear aims and objectives for the service which staff understood. The registered manager led the service well and processes were in place to enable people and staff to raise issues. The provider had reviewed and improved their systems for identifying, capturing and managing organisational risks and issues for people. They had processes in place to monitor the quality of the service they provided and to enable them to identify areas for improvement.

People's experience of this service

We spoke with people, their relatives and professionals about the care provided and made observations.We saw people were happy with the support staff provided and engaged doing activities they wanted to. We heard how each person was involved in activities and experiences which were individual to them and their needs and personal interests. A relative said, “Yes, [name of person] has a really good outside life.” We saw staff supported people to attend appointments but also understood the need to obtain people’s consent and respected their right to decline.

Relatives told us their loved one’s care needs were each very unique and staff worked with them and professionals involved to plan and support their loved ones. They felt the care provided was tailored to people’s needs and circumstances. Relatives felt the service was flexible to changes in people’s presentation and needs. There were regular care reviews, and it was felt the provider listened. People decided if they wanted their relatives to access their records.

Relatives said staff informed them of incidents which occurred and said reviews took place and changes were made afterwards if required. They felt communication with the provider overall had improved. A relative said, “I feel we’ve got a good relationship with the provider.”