CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Rendlesham Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2021
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found the home was not yet consistently well-led and its improvement work was still incomplete.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 28 and 30 June 2021. Inspectors looked at Safe and Well-led because of concerns about safe care, records and how the home was managed. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care and medicines, and reviewed care, medicines, staffing and management records.
Safe was rated Good. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems, enough staff, safe recruitment and appropriate infection control. People said they felt safe and received help when they needed it.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The provider had an improvement plan, but it was not yet fully in place or consistently used. There had also been no registered manager since June 2020, although a new manager had started in June 2021 and was making changes.
The overall rating stayed Good because the other three areas were not inspected at this visit. Their previous ratings were used. The local authority was not placing new people at the home until improvements were made, and CQC said it would continue to monitor the service.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and received help when they needed it. Risk assessments and guidance were in place to help staff manage risks.
“People told us they felt safe living in the service.” from the report
Medicines were managed safely
Inspectors observed medicines being given safely. Staff had training and competency checks, and audits covered administration, storage, ordering and disposal.
“There were systems in place to safely manage medicines.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment properly, arranging testing and following guidance on visits and infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
New management was making changes
Staff and relatives gave positive feedback about the new manager's approach. Staff said they were being listened to and involved in improvements.
“Staff we spoke with were positive about how the management team were implementing changes and improvements” from the report
Improvement plan not complete
needs fixingThe provider had identified areas needing change, but the improvements were not yet fully implemented or consistently embedded in practice.
“Although several areas had been addressed, the improvements had not yet been fully implemented and embedded in practice.” from the report
Management continuity
needs fixingThere had been no registered manager since June 2020, with several management changes before the new manager started in June 2021.
“There has been no registered manager in post since June 2020.” from the report
Care records still being improved
needs fixingCare records were being changed to give staff clearer guidance, but this work was not yet complete at the time of inspection.
“People's care records were in the process of being improved to guide staff in how people's needs were to be met” from the report
Some relatives were not told about incidents
needs fixingA relative told inspectors they had not received information about two incidents in 2020. The management team said they would review the records and speak with the relative.
“A relative told us about two incidents in 2020 for which they had not received information.” from the report
- 01Which actions in the improvement plan are now complete, and how do you check that they are consistently followed?
- 02Has the manager's application to become registered with CQC been approved?
- 03How have care records been improved, and how do you check that staff follow the updated plans?
- 04What was learned from the incidents in 2020, including the incidents that relatives said were not communicated to them?
- 05Are agency staff still being used, and what happens if a booked member of staff does not arrive?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 July 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, February 2021
Rendlesham Care Centre had a targeted inspection and was not rated; inspectors found good infection control but some care records were incomplete.
This was a targeted inspection on 20 January 2021. Inspectors looked mainly at how the home assessed and reduced the risk of pressure ulcers. They also checked infection prevention and control, including COVID-19 arrangements.
Inspectors found that pressure ulcer risks were assessed and that care plans gave staff guidance. However, some records did not clearly show repositioning times, pressure-relieving equipment settings or why oral care was not recorded. The management team said these issues would be addressed.
Inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were effective. Staff were using protective equipment properly, and the home had arrangements for testing, social distancing and managing outbreaks.
The home was inspected but not rated at this visit. Its last full inspection rating was Good, published on 3 March 2018. This inspection did not examine the circumstances of the serious injury that prompted it.
Pressure ulcer risk assessments
Care records showed that risks of pressure ulcers developing or getting worse were assessed, with guidance in care plans about reducing those risks.
“People's care records demonstrated risks associated with pressure ulcers developing and deteriorating were assessed.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for preventing and managing infections, including COVID-19.
“Staff were following good infection prevention and control practices which helped to minimise risks to people.” from the report
Health and safety monitoring
The home monitored health and safety and took action when risks were identified.
“The health and safety in the service was monitored and actions taken to address any risks.” from the report
Incomplete repositioning records
needs fixingTwo of the five records reviewed had inconsistent information about when people needed repositioning and did not record the settings of pressure-relieving equipment.
“Two of the five records reviewed had inconsistencies regarding the times people required support with repositioning and had no information regarding the setting of their pressure relieving equipment.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure repositioning times are recorded consistently?
- 02How do you record the settings of each person's pressure-relieving equipment?
- 03How do you record oral care when a person is independent or does not receive support?
- 04Who is currently managing the home, and when will the new manager complete their induction?
- 05How do you check that the infection control arrangements remain effective?
This was a targeted inspection of specific pressure ulcer risks and infection prevention and control; it did not assess the whole service or change the previous ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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.
Every inspection of Rendlesham Care Centre
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2016Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- January 2016Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 September 2013.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
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 £1,260 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.