CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infection risks through visitor checks, testing, protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and an up-to-date infection control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found robust COVID-19 infection control measures.
Inspectors visited the home on 7 April 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
They found systems to reduce infection risks. These included testing people and staff, visitor checks, isolation for new admissions, use of protective equipment, social distancing and regular cleaning.
The home was inspected but not rated. The report only gives findings about infection prevention and control, so it does not provide an overall rating of the quality of care.
COVID-19 planning
The home had plans and risk assessments for preventing and managing COVID-19. New residents were assessed, tested and required to complete a 14-day isolation period.
“The home had prepared for the possibility of an outbreak of COVID-19 and had implemented robust systems and practices to prevent the risk of the spread of infection.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors had to take a lateral flow test and receive a negative result before entering. Protective equipment was provided.
“Any visitors had to undertake a Lateral Flow Device (LFD) test and receive a negative result before being allowed into the home.” from the report
Clean surroundings
Inspectors saw clean areas and equipment being cleaned between uses. Cleaning records were also available.
“We observed areas around the home were very clean, and equipment, such as mobile hoists, were cleaned between use.” from the report
Testing and monitoring
People and staff were tested regularly. Daily observations, including temperature and oxygen readings, were recorded for residents.
“People and staff were regularly tested for COVID-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are visitors still required to test before entering the home, and what protective equipment is provided?
- 02How often are residents and staff currently tested for COVID-19?
- 03How are new residents assessed, tested and supported during any isolation period?
- 04How often are shared equipment and bathrooms cleaned, and how are these cleaning records checked?
- 05What ratings or inspection findings cover care quality, staffing, activities and management, as this report did not assess them?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 May 2021 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.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with medicines management improved since the last inspection.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 26 November 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff and managers. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staff records, audits, accidents and complaints.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe, were treated with dignity and received kind, personalised care. Staff supported people's health, food and drink needs, activities and choices.
Medicines were managed safely overall. Inspectors found that two medicines had not been recorded in a separate book because staff thought district nurses were responsible. The records were corrected when this was raised.
The Safe rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good because concerns about medicines at the previous inspection had been addressed. The overall Good rating stayed the same.
Improved medicines safety
The previous concerns about medicines being left unsecured or the trolley being unlocked were addressed. Inspectors saw medicines being given safely and found secure storage and robust audits.
“At this inspection we found medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff positively, and inspectors observed patient, understanding relationships. People were supported to make choices and were treated with dignity and privacy.
“People were treated with dignity and respect and had the privacy they wanted.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes, communication needs and wider support needs. Staff knew people well and adapted support to their preferences.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Activities and choice
The home offered activities, one-to-one support, entertainment and outings based on what people wanted to do. People could also choose where to eat and what food to have.
“Activities were planned with people according to what they wanted to do.” from the report
Management checks
The home used detailed audits and follow-up checks to identify and act on improvements. People, relatives and staff were also involved in giving feedback.
“These were comprehensive and detailed.” from the report
Two medicines not recorded
needs fixingInspectors found that two medicines had not been entered in a separate recording book. Staff had misunderstood who was responsible, although the records were completed as soon as this was pointed out.
“We found that two medicines had not been recorded.” from the report
Informal concerns were not logged
minorNo formal complaints had been recorded in the previous year because issues raised with staff were dealt with straight away instead. Families may want to ask how informal concerns are tracked and reviewed.
“any issues people raised with staff were responded to straight away, rather than being logged.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that every medicine is recorded correctly, including medicines administered by district nurses?
- 02How are staffing levels adjusted when people's care and support needs change?
- 03How are people's care plans reviewed with them and their relatives where appropriate?
- 04How are informal concerns recorded, reviewed and used to improve the service?
- 05Which activities and outings are currently available for people who prefer one-to-one support or to stay in their rooms?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the Safe rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good and the other ratings remaining Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 January 2019 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 Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount Care Home →
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount Care Home →
- June 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 September 2011.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.