CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ridgemede Care
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely, arranging testing and managing admissions, visitors and possible outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 26 January 2021. It looked at how the home was prepared to prevent and control COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, cleanliness and possible outbreaks safely. They also found that the infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
The home had introduced practical measures, including lockers and a shower for staff, individually fitted FFP3 masks, infection control training and regular information for staff. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control arrangements
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable measures covering visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleanliness and outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Staff protective equipment
All staff had been fitted with enhanced protective masks in preparation for any future need.
“All staff had been fitted with an FFP3 mask in preparation for any future need.” from the report
Staff facilities
The home created a locker room with full-length lockers and a shower. This supported safe storage of outdoor clothing and reduced the risk of cross-contamination.
“Each staff member had a full length locker enabling safe storage of outdoor coats and limiting cross contamination.” from the report
Staff information and training
Staff received infection control training and regular information about policies, testing, symptoms and wellbeing.
“Staff received a monthly bulletin which included important information such as 'policy of the month', Government advice, information about testing and COVID-19 symptoms to look for.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently prevented from catching or spreading infections?
- 02How are people admitted safely to the home now?
- 03How often are people using the service and staff tested?
- 04How do you make sure staff use personal protective equipment safely and effectively?
- 05How is the infection prevention and control policy kept up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was inspected but not rated and did not provide a full assessment of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 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, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements made since the previous inspection.
Inspectors visited on 19 and 20 February 2018. The first day was unannounced and the second was announced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also checked care records, staff files, medicines, rotas, training records, accidents, complaints and audits.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable risk assessments and good support for people's health and nutrition. Care plans included people's personal histories, preferences and changing needs.
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff encouraged independence and responded quickly when people needed help. The home had a visible management team, regular checks and an open culture where people, relatives and staff could share their views.
The previous inspection found a breach involving the display of the CQC rating, as well as concerns about medicines, environmental safety and consent. The report says the provider had taken sufficient action and these matters had improved.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, given by trained staff and checked through audits. Inspectors checked medicines for eight people and found the quantities were correct.
“People received their medicines safely, accurately, and in accordance with the prescriber's instructions.” from the report
Enough staff
Staffing levels were based on people's needs. Inspectors saw that staff were not rushed and responded quickly to call bells.
“There were enough skilled staff deployed to support people and meet their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people gently, protected their dignity and encouraged them to remain as independent as possible.
“Staff treated people with dignity, respect and kindness.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, interests and support needs. They were updated when people's needs changed.
“Care plans were developed and maintained about every aspect of people's care and were centred on individual needs and requirements.” from the report
Supportive leadership
People, relatives and staff described the management as approachable and supportive. Regular audits were used to identify and track improvements.
“The service had an open culture where people had confidence to ask questions about their care and were encouraged to participate in conversations with staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you meet my relative's needs if they require nursing care, given that the home is not registered to provide nursing care?
- 02How will you keep my relative's electronic care record up to date, and when will staff begin recording care using the planned mobile devices?
- 03How will you support my relative's food preferences and dietary needs, and what alternatives are available if they do not want the main meal?
- 04How will you involve me and my relative when care plans or decisions about care need to change?
- 05How do you check that medicines continue to be given and recorded correctly?
This was a comprehensive inspection of the whole service, including the premises and care provided, and all five ratings were assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 March 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 Ridgemede Care
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.