CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Richardson Grove Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. There were enough staff, risks were assessed, and infection prevention arrangements were effective, but inspectors recommended a review of how medicine alerts are acted on.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, choices and aspirations. Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with food, health appointments and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff provided kind and compassionate care and respected people's privacy, dignity and communication needs. People and relatives were involved in care planning and decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People were supported to follow their interests, go out and develop everyday living skills. Staff used individual communication methods and responded to complaints and concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider and manager had effective checks on quality and safety. Staff, people and relatives could give feedback, and action was taken when improvements were identified.
What inspectors found, September 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but the home needed to improve how medicine alerts were followed up.
Inspectors visited without notice on four days in July 2023. They spoke with seven people, two relatives and nine staff. They also observed daily life and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, personalised support, good communication and a clean, suitable environment.
People were supported to make choices, build independence, take part in activities and use local services. Staff were described as kind and respectful, and relatives said their family members were safe and happy.
Inspectors recommended that the home review how it acts on medicine alerts, because they could not confirm that alerts were always dealt with promptly. This was the first inspection of the newly registered service, and its overall rating improved from Requires Improvement under the previous provider.
Choice and independence
Staff supported people to make choices, take positive risks and develop skills. People were encouraged to live their lives in ways that mattered to them.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests;” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff respond calmly to people's emotions and sensory needs. People said staff were kind and good.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in activities and outings that matched their interests, including walks, gym visits and visits to a local pub.
“People were supported to participate in their chosen social and leisure interests on a regular basis.” from the report
Good communication
Staff understood people's individual communication methods, including signs, objects, pictures, sounds and body language.
“People who had individual ways of communicating, using body language, sounds, pictures and symbols could interact comfortably with staff and others involved in their care and support because staff had the necessary skills to understand them.” from the report
Medicine alerts
needs fixingThere was a process for receiving medicine alerts, but inspectors could not verify that alerts were acted on promptly. They recommended that the provider review its policy and processes.
“There was a process in place to receive medicine alerts. However, we were not able to verify if the alerts were being acted upon in a timely manner.” from the report
Mealtime interaction
minorInspectors saw mealtimes that were functional but had little interaction between people and staff. The manager said staff were encouraged to sit and eat with people.
“We observed mealtimes which looked functional with little interaction between people and staff.” from the report
- 01How are medicine alerts received, recorded and checked, and how do you make sure they are acted on promptly?
- 02What has changed since inspectors observed little interaction between staff and people at mealtimes?
- 03How will you continue to support my relative's preferred communication method and record any changes in their needs?
- 04How will my relative be involved in setting and reviewing their goals, activities and care plan?
- 05How are relatives told about concerns, incidents or changes in care, and how is learning shared with staff?
This was an unannounced inspection of the newly registered service covering all five CQC questions, the care provided and the premises; the previous Requires Improvement rating was under an earlier provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 September 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.
Every inspection of Richardson Grove Limited
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- September 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 May 2022.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of West Northamptonshire
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 £1,280 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
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.