CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, but the outbreak plan needed more work.
Inspectors visited the home on 10 March 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It focused on infection prevention and control, rather than the full range of care.
Inspectors were assured that staff and visitors used PPE correctly, supplies were available and stored safely, and cleaning and staff training had been completed. The home also supported people's social and emotional wellbeing.
The infection outbreak plan needed further development. The home was aware that some redecoration was needed. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
PPE and infection control
Staff and essential visitors used appropriate PPE. Supplies were sufficient, safely stored and kept hygienic.
“All staff and essential visitors used appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Cleaning and training
Deep cleaning was completed and recorded. All staff, including catering and housekeeping staff, had infection prevention and control training.
“Deep cleaning of all areas of the home was completed and recorded.” from the report
Emotional support
Staff supported people's social and emotional wellbeing, with referrals made when extra support was needed.
“Staff supported people's social and emotional wellbeing. Where people required additional support, they were referred to appropriate services.” from the report
Outbreak plan
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured that infection outbreaks could be prevented or managed effectively. The provider's outbreak plan needed more development.
“We were somewhat assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed. The infection outbreak plan required further development.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to the infection outbreak plan since the inspection?
- 02How would you manage an infection outbreak in the home now?
- 03How are PPE supplies checked and kept available?
- 04How often are deep cleaning and infection control records reviewed?
- 05What redecoration was identified as necessary, and has it been completed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection of all five care questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 March 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, September 2020
Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, personalised care, but quality checks and staff morale needed improvement.
Inspectors visited without a full day's notice on 04 and 07 August 2020. They spoke with six people, four relatives and the managers, invited staff to share views, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and training records.
People and relatives said the home was safe, comfortable and welcoming. Inspectors found improved risk assessments and medicine arrangements, enough staff, safe recruitment and good infection control. People were supported to stay independent and make choices.
The home was rated Good for Safe. It was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led because audits were not yet strong enough to show that improvements would last. Staff had mixed views about management and some said morale was low.
The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. The home was no longer in breach of regulations, but CQC recommended further work on quality assurance.
Personalised support
People and relatives said care was personalised and that independence was encouraged. Relatives felt people's wellbeing and independence had improved since moving in.
“Relatives said people's well-being and independence had improved "leaps and bounds" since moving to the home.” from the report
Improved safety
Risk assessments had improved and staff understood how to reduce risks while supporting people's independence.
“Risk assessments had improved. These now set out the individual risks to each person and the strategies used to minimise these.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors found that the home followed national infection control guidance, provided protective equipment and gave staff extra training during the pandemic.
“The service followed the latest national guidelines relating to the prevention and control of infection.” from the report
Enough staff
People said staff were available when needed. Inspectors found staffing arrangements were kept under review and recruitment checks were completed.
“There were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Quality checks were not fully established
needs fixingAudits were not yet strong enough to prove that improvements would continue. A new medicine audit system had not started at the time of inspection.
“Since the last inspection some records and systems had been improved but auditing processes were not always in place to make sure these improvements were embedded.” from the report
Medicine records
minorInspectors discussed some minor issues with medicine records. New checks were being prepared to help staff record medicines consistently.
“Some minor points about medicine records were discussed.” from the report
Mixed staff views
needs fixingStaff did not all feel included by the management team. Some reported low morale, and the provider had brought in an employment specialist to address grievances.
“Some were positive about the management style, whilst others felt excluded and said morale was low.” from the report
- 01What medicine audits have now been introduced, and what action is taken if an error or pattern is found?
- 02How do you check that risk assessments and medicine records remain accurate and up to date?
- 03What has been done to address the staff concerns about feeling excluded and low morale?
- 04How are staff champion roles being used to monitor the quality of care?
- 05Which ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection rather than checked during this visit?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 September 2020 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 Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home →
- September 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home →
- April 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014Inspected but not rated
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 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.