CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ridgecott
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about testing, admissions, outbreak management and the infection-control policy. They were not fully assured about some visitors' PPE and the effect of decorating on hand washing and distancing.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Ridgecott was inspected but not rated; infection controls were mostly assured, but PPE and decorating arrangements needed attention.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 13 January 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found regular COVID-19 testing, risk assessments, a clean environment and extra cleaning. People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends, and staff had infection-control training.
Inspectors were not fully assured about PPE use by some visitors. Decorating work also made hand washing and social distancing harder. The manager addressed the PPE issue immediately, and the provider said decorating would stop for the time being.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give a new overall quality rating.
Testing and risk checks
People, staff and visitors were tested regularly. Risk assessments were completed, with extra measures for people at higher risk of infection.
“The provider participated in regular COVID-19 testing of people, staff and visitors.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was very clean, with extra cleaning of frequently touched surfaces and infection-control audits.
“The environment was very clean. Additional cleaning was taking place including frequently touched surfaces.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends through social media and regular phone calls.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their family and friends through the use of social media platforms and regular phone calls.” from the report
Support for wellbeing
The manager and provider offered extra one-to-one and telephone support for emotional needs.
“The registered manager and provider ensured people living in the service, and staff, had access to additional support” from the report
Visitor PPE
needs fixingSome visitors working in the home were not wearing PPE in line with government guidance and the home's policy. The manager addressed this immediately, but inspectors recommended a review of PPE use.
“We saw some visitors who were working in the service were not wearing PPE in line with government guidance and the homes visiting policy.” from the report
Decorating work
needs fixingDecorating in communal areas made it harder for staff to access hand-washing facilities and for people to keep away from contractors. The provider said the work would stop at that time.
“decorating made it difficult for them to do this effectively. For example, staff were not easily able to access handwashing facilities” from the report
- 01What changes were made after the inspection to make sure every visitor wears the correct PPE?
- 02Has the planned decorating stopped, and how can staff and residents access hand-washing facilities during any future work?
- 03How often are people, staff and visitors tested now?
- 04How are people supported to keep in contact with family and friends?
- 05What extra infection-control measures are in place for people assessed as being at higher risk?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 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.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Ridgecott was rated Good in all five areas, with kind, person-centred care and a recommendation to improve laundry infection control.
This was a planned inspection of the care home. One inspector met six people, spoke with staff, relatives and professionals, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found people were safe and supported by enough trained staff. Medicines were managed safely, care plans reflected people's needs, and people were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home offered activities and support to go out, maintain family relationships and build independence. Inspectors did identify that the laundry did not clearly separate clean and dirty items, and recommended a review of infection control arrangements.
The overall rating was Good, and each of the five areas was rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 18 August 2017.
Enough trained staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks, induction and supervision were in place.
“There were enough staff to meet the needs of people.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People appeared relaxed and happy, and staff were friendly and gentle. Families and professionals also described caring support.
“The interactions we observed were friendly and gentle.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's histories, likes, dislikes and communication needs. Staff knew people well and supported their choices.
“Care planning documents were detailed and contained people's life histories and likes and dislikes and preferences” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Reviews included medicines given only when needed.
“Medicines were stored, taken delivery of, disposed of and administered safely.” from the report
Activities and independence
People had activities inside the home and opportunities to go to shops, cafes and places of local interest. Staff also supported people to develop daily living skills.
“People were supported to go out daily if that is what they wanted to do.” from the report
Laundry infection control
needs fixingClean and dirty laundry were not clearly separated, and there was no soap for staff after handling dirty linen. Inspectors made a recommendation to review the laundry arrangements.
“We found the laundry was not clearly separating clean from dirty linens and there was no soap for staff to wash their hands after handling dirty linens.” from the report
Some areas needed improvement
minorOne communal room needed redecoration and had not yet been equipped as the planned sensory room. The decking also needed attention before it could be used in summer.
“There was one communal room on the ground floor which needed some re-decoration and thought put into its purpose.” from the report
Occasional waits for outings
minorSome feedback suggested that people sometimes had to wait for the service vehicle or for staff when going out.
“We received some feedback to suggest sometimes there was a little wait for the service vehicle or for staff.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to separate clean and dirty laundry?
- 02Is soap now available for staff after handling dirty laundry?
- 03Has the communal room been redecorated and equipped as a sensory room?
- 04Has the decking been repaired and made safe to use?
- 05How do you reduce waiting times for the service vehicle or staff when people want to go out?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, including the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 April 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 Ridgecott
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 April 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Plymouth
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.