CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rawleigh House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People's risks were assessed and regularly reviewed. Inspectors found safe medicines practice, suitable staffing, safe recruitment and effective infection prevention arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused inspection. The previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused inspection. The previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused inspection. The previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive and supportive culture, regular audits and good working relationships with health and community organisations.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rawleigh House is rated Good; inspectors found people were safe, supported by consistent staff and living in a positive, well-run home.
The home supports up to six autistic people and people with learning disabilities. Five people lived there when inspectors visited. The inspection was unannounced and took place on 29 June 2023, with inspection activity ending on 4 July.
Inspectors spoke with all five people, three relatives, eight staff members and a health professional. They reviewed risk assessments, medicine records, recruitment files and records about how the home was managed. They found that risks were reviewed, medicines were recorded correctly, staffing matched people's needs and infection control arrangements were suitable.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only. Both were rated Good, and the overall rating stayed Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating.
People felt safe
People who could express their views said they felt safe and happy. Relatives and a health professional also gave positive feedback about safety and care.
“People who were able to, told us they felt safe and happy at the home.” from the report
Risks were managed
The home assessed and regularly reviewed risks including going out, moving and repositioning, epilepsy and diabetes. People also had personalised emergency evacuation plans.
“People's risks were assessed, monitored and regularly reviewed.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Staff who gave medicines were trained and assessed as competent. Medicine administration records were complete and accurate, and medicines were stored safely.
“These were complete and accurate. An updated staff signature sheet was in place for reference.” from the report
Consistent staff team
People were supported by a consistent group of staff who knew them well. A regular group of agency staff was used when sickness cover was needed.
“A familiar and consistent group of care staff meant they knew people well.” from the report
Supportive culture
Inspectors found an open, supportive culture. Relatives felt listened to, and staff were encouraged to gain skills and qualifications.
“There was an open and supportive culture at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and support my relative's specific risks, including any epilepsy, diabetes, mobility or going-out needs?
- 02How will you make sure agency staff understand my relative's communication needs and personal support guidelines?
- 03What evidence can you show me about medicines that are only taken occasionally and how staff decide when to give them?
- 04How will you support my relative to take part in wider community activities, such as local day services?
- 05What were the findings of the most recent health, medicines and safety audits, and what improvements are still planned?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection published on 6 September 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 July 2023 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with clear improvements since the previous inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 13 July 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with people, staff, a relative and professionals, and checked care, medicines, recruitment, training, complaints and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, kind care and support that respected people's choices, communication needs and independence.
The previous inspection in September and October 2017 had found concerns in all five areas. The provider's action plan had been followed and inspectors found improvements in safeguarding, decision-making, dignity, personalised care and management oversight.
There was no registered manager in post. A new manager was in place and had applied to become registered. The report also noted that the last satisfaction survey had been completed in 2015, with a new easy-read survey planned.
Safeguarding improved
Staff had received safeguarding training and said they felt confident to report concerns. The provider had introduced confidential whistleblowing arrangements and systems for learning from incidents.
“Staff were able to tell us how they would feel confident to report safeguarding concerns, where previously they had not.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to support people without rushing them. Medicines were securely stored, correctly recorded and given only by trained and assessed staff.
“Medicines were managed safely, securely stored, correctly recorded and only administered by staff that were trained and competent to give medicines.” from the report
Kind, respectful care
Staff understood people's individual needs and supported their privacy, dignity and independence. Inspectors saw calm and positive interactions.
“People were supported by staff that treated them with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised communication
Care plans included people's preferences and communication needs. Easy-read information, pictorial menus and a rota board helped people understand choices and who would support them.
“We found that information was available in easy read pictorial formats.” from the report
Stronger management oversight
The provider had introduced more audits, daily checks and analysis of trends and incidents. People, relatives and staff said the culture had improved.
“Improvements had been made to quality monitoring systems within the home.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe home had been without a registered manager for several months. A manager was in place and had applied for registration, but the report does not confirm the outcome.
“The service had not had a registered manager in place since 08 January 2018.” from the report
Limited recent satisfaction feedback
minorThe last satisfaction survey had been completed in 2015. The manager said an easy-read survey was planned for August 2018.
“However, the last satisfaction survey was completed in 2015.” from the report
- 01Has the manager's application to become the registered manager been approved, and who is responsible for the home now?
- 02Was the planned easy-read satisfaction survey completed, and what changes were made in response to people's views?
- 03How are safeguarding concerns and whistleblowing reports handled now, and what lessons have been learned from recent incidents?
- 04How are medicines reviewed and checked, including medicines given covertly and the planned reviews under STOMP?
- 05How are people's communication needs, choices and activity plans kept up to date?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including the building and care, and it assessed all five CQC questions; inspectors met three people and reviewed a sample of records, including records for two people. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 September 2018 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 Rawleigh House
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 December 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
15 live-in carers within about an hour of Dorset
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 £1,040 to £1,340 a week. 11 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Even when things get a bit chaotic (as they sometimes do!), you’ve handled it with patience and a sense of humour — which is gold.”
“Nina was patient, focussed on my aunt's physical well-being, and unfazed by what at the time was a new and uncertain situation”
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.