CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Rambla Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed and monitored, staffing levels were considered safe, medicines were managed safely and infection control measures were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed or rated in this inspection report.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed or rated in this inspection report.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed or rated in this inspection report.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers had effective oversight, used audits to monitor quality and safety, and acted on feedback and concerns.
What inspectors found, June 2021
Rambla Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found people were safe and the home was well-led.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 April 2021. One inspector visited the home, reviewed care, staffing, medicines and management records, and spoke with people and staff. Relatives and people were also contacted by telephone after the visit.
The inspection was prompted partly by concerns about night staffing and how risks were managed. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. They found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk plans, safe medicines practice and effective infection control measures.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good, as they had been at the previous inspection. The report did not give ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe and staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns. Investigations were carried out when concerns were raised.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse and avoidable harm and people told us they felt safe living at the service.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and saw staff respond to people's needs promptly. The manager also carried out unannounced night checks.
“A safe number of staff were on duty and staff we spoke with confirmed this.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Medicines were stored, recorded and given safely. Staff had regular training and their competence was checked.
“Medicines were stored, recorded and administered safely. Regular audits were completed to identify any issues.” from the report
Good management oversight
Regular audits were used to find concerns and areas for improvement. Lessons were shared with staff.
“The registered manager and provider had effective oversight of how the service was being run.” from the report
Communication with relatives
During COVID-19, relatives received regular updates through newsletters and questionnaires. Inspectors were told communication and safety measures had been good.
“Additional measures had been put in place during Covid-19 to ensure regular updates were provided to relatives” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that night staffing levels remain safe?
- 02How are risks such as poor skin integrity or low fluid intake monitored and reviewed?
- 03How often are medicines audits completed, and how are any problems put right?
- 04How will relatives receive updates about visiting arrangements if infection control guidance changes?
- 05How are people's and relatives' feedback and complaints recorded and acted on?
This was an inspection focused on Safe and Well-led; the report gives no ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 June 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, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 09 July 2019 and 11 July 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, visitors, staff and professionals, and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable training and good links with health professionals.
Care plans and records had improved and reflected people's needs. People were treated with dignity, involved in decisions and offered activities based on their preferences.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, published on 1 October 2018. The home had completed an action plan, and inspectors found it was no longer in breach of regulations.
Improved care records
Inspectors found that care records had improved and reflected people's changing needs. Staff understood people's individual care requirements.
“Improvements had been made to the quality of care records. They were detailed, up to date and reflected the care being delivered.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff to meet people's needs, and recruitment checks were carried out. Medicines were received, stored, administered and returned safely.
“Enough staff were deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff supported privacy and encouraged people to remain as independent as possible.
“Staff treated people as equals. They showed genuine concern for people and were keen to ensure people's rights were upheld” from the report
Good health support
Staff monitored people's health and contacted medical professionals when needed. Inspectors received positive feedback about the care of people with complex medical needs.
“The service manages people with complex medical needs and does this very well.” from the report
Activities and personal choice
Activities included arts and crafts, quizzes, games, exercise sessions and music. Staff also provided one-to-one time for people who needed extra support.
“The activities person carried out one-to-one interactions with people such as nail care, putting music and films on” from the report
Infection-control equipment
minorThere was not enough storage in the sluice for cleaned commode pots, and staff did not have protective eye wear when cleaning them. The manager said drying racks and goggles would be ordered straight away.
“There was a lack of storage in the sluice for cleaned commode pots and no protective eye wear for staff when cleaning these.” from the report
- 01Have the drying racks and protective goggles mentioned in the report been provided?
- 02How are care records kept up to date when a person's needs change?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough suitably trained staff on each shift?
- 04How are activities matched to my relative's preferences and communication needs?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in care reviews and complaints?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 August 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 Rambla Nursing Home
7 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 August 2015.
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 North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.