CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Redcot Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection prevention arrangements, with some resources suggested for further development.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 24 March 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than the full range of care quality areas.
Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, cleanliness, social distancing and admissions safely. Plans were in place to isolate people when needed, including people returning from hospital.
The home supported contact with family and friends through telephone, internet, garden, window and indoor visits. Staff also received pandemic training and support for their wellbeing.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a rated score for the other care areas.
Infection prevention
The home had arrangements covering visitors, testing, protective equipment, cleaning, isolation and outbreak management.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to stay in touch through telephone and internet contact, as well as carefully arranged visits.
“People were well supported by staff to have telephone and internet contact with their family and friends.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors were screened, checked for temperature, tested and given protective equipment before entering.
“Visitors were asked a series of screening questions, had their temperature checked on arrival and were subject to rapid lateral flow testing.” from the report
Staff wellbeing
The home had welfare review processes and additional guidance to support staff during the pandemic.
“Effective welfare review processes were in place to monitor and support staff.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not specify what needed to be developed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01How are visitors currently screened, tested and provided with personal protective equipment?
- 02How often are people using the service and staff tested, and what happens when a test is positive?
- 03What arrangements are used to isolate someone who returns from hospital?
- 04How are visits with family and friends arranged now?
- 05How do staff communicate with people who have difficulty hearing when masks are being worn?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed in detail. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 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, October 2019
Redcot Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with recruitment of a registered manager still under way.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 September 2019. Two inspectors spoke with four people living at the home, five staff members, a visiting district nurse and relatives. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files, training information and quality checks.
Inspectors found that people felt safe and were treated with dignity and respect. Staff understood people’s needs, preferences and risks. Medicines were given safely, people had enough to eat and drink, and staff helped people access healthcare. People could choose how to spend their time and were supported to stay independent and involved in activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says this meant people’s outcomes were consistently good and the service was consistently managed. The previous inspection was also rated Good, published on 14 March 2017.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding, changing risks and how to report concerns.
“People told us they felt safe living at Redcot Residential Care Home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw positive interactions. Staff respected people’s privacy, dignity, choices and independence.
“People were well treated and supported by staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people’s preferences and detailed information for staff. People were supported to follow hobbies, join activities and maintain relationships.
“Care plans showed detailed information that made staff aware of people's preferences and individualised details” from the report
Safe medicines practice
People received medicines as prescribed. Staff had training and competency checks, and records were complete at the inspection.
“People were supported with their medicine on time, in a safe way and as prescribed.” from the report
Open management
People and staff said management listened to concerns and ideas. Regular audits were used to identify and address issues.
“The manager promoted transparency and honesty.” from the report
Registered manager vacancy
needs fixingThere was no manager registered with the CQC when inspectors visited. A regional manager was acting in that role while recruitment continued.
“The service did not have a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission, the regional manager was acting as registered manager at the time of inspection.” from the report
End of life plans still being developed
needs fixingEveryone had an end of life plan, but the report says these plans were still being expanded to improve their detail.
“These were an ongoing project for the registered manager who was adding even more detail to bring them up to a good standard of detail.” from the report
Previous medicines error
minorThe home had experienced a medicines error and missed medicines. The manager responded with refresher training to reduce the chance of a repeat.
“The registered manager had also arranged refresher training for all staff more recently following a medicines error.” from the report
- 01Who is the registered manager now, and how long have they been in post?
- 02What action was taken after the medicines error, and have there been any further medicines mistakes?
- 03How detailed are residents’ end of life plans now, and how are families involved in writing them?
- 04How are residents’ personal interests and activity choices recorded and reviewed?
- 05How do you check that staffing levels remain sufficient for people’s care and emotional needs?
This was an unannounced inspection that assessed all five key questions and looked at both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 October 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 Redcot Residential Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Redcot Residential Care Home →
- October 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Redcot Residential Care Home →
- March 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 January 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.