CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Gateway House
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Medicines records and storage were not always safe or accurate. Inspectors also found problems with face masks, hand hygiene, contaminated protective equipment and staff COVID-19 testing.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, including communication and sensory needs. Staff had suitable training and supported people with food, healthcare, decision-making and independence.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were patient, warm and respectful. People and their relatives were involved in care decisions, and staff supported people to communicate and maintain important relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and records were clear and detailed. Staff supported people's goals, interests, communication needs and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Managers were approachable and staff and relatives described a positive culture. However, quality checks were not strong enough to find the problems with medicines, infection control and Legionella safety.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care but unsafe medicines, infection control and weak oversight.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home. It was unannounced and took place on 23 May 2022. Inspectors spoke with two people using the service, three relatives and four staff. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good for Effective, Caring and Responsive. People were supported to make choices, build independence, communicate in ways that suited them and take part in activities they enjoyed. Inspectors found staff to be kind, respectful and knowledgeable about people's individual needs.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Safe and Well-led, giving an overall rating of Requires Improvement. Medicines records and storage were not always safe. Some infection control practices were not followed, and checks on water safety and quality were not strong enough to identify these problems.
Choice and independence
People were involved in planning their care and goals. They could choose activities and were supported to develop everyday living skills.
“The model of care and setting maximised people's choice, control and independence.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff understood people's communication and sensory needs and treated them with warmth, patience and respect.
“Staff members showed warmth and respect when interacting with people.” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff took time to understand how each person communicated and adapted their approach when people needed longer to respond.
“Staff had good awareness, skills and understanding of individual communication needs.” from the report
Supportive leadership culture
Although management checks needed improvement, staff and relatives said managers were approachable, supportive and open to feedback.
“Staff and relatives told us the management team were approachable and took a genuine interest in what people, staff, family, and professionals had to say.” from the report
Medicines safety
seriousMedicines records were not always accurate, and there was not always enough written guidance for medicines given when needed or at different doses. Medicines were also not always stored safely.
“Records about medicines were not always accurate so it was not always possible to tell if medicines had been given as prescribed or could be accounted for.” from the report
Infection control
seriousSome staff did not use face masks, protective equipment or hand hygiene correctly. COVID-19 testing was also not always completed before staff started work.
“The poor use of face masks put people at risk of COVID-19 transmission.” from the report
Water safety checks
needs fixingThe home did not have a Legionella policy, and its risk assessment and water safety checks were not sufficient. The risk assessment had not been completed by a competent person.
“Also, sufficient water safety checks were not taking place.” from the report
Weak quality checks
needs fixingThe home's governance systems had not identified the problems found during the inspection. The provider was asked to strengthen its monitoring and oversight.
“Quality assurance processes needed strengthening and embedding into practice as they had not identified the shortfalls we found at this inspection in relation to medicines, infection control and Legionella.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to ensure medicines records are accurate and all 'when required' medicines have clear written instructions?
- 02How do you now check that medicines, including insulin and waste medicines, are stored safely?
- 03What procedures ensure staff wear masks correctly, dispose of contaminated protective equipment and clean their hands properly?
- 04What water safety checks and Legionella risk assessment are now in place, and who completes them?
- 05How do your quality checks confirm that these improvements are working and identify any further shortfalls?
This was the first, unannounced inspection of the care home and covered all five CQC questions, including infection control and medicines. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 June 2022 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 Gateway House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 March 2021.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
97 live-in carers within about an hour of Rotherham
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 80 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.