CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ridgemount
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe care but activities and management oversight were not consistently good enough.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 29 June 2021. They spoke with five people, seven staff and other professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe. People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, staffing, risk assessments and infection control were found to be safe.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Responsive and Well-led. People did not always receive activities that were meaningful to them. Management audits did not always find problems in records or activities. There was also no registered manager in post.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement. The other key questions were not inspected at this visit, so their previous ratings were used.
Medicines
Medicines were administered as prescribed. Records checked by inspectors were accurate and up to date.
“There were safe and effective systems for the ordering, storage, administration and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans included people's routines, life histories and specific support needs. Staff said the plans were clear and useful.
“Care plans were person centred and contained information about people's daily routines and specific care and support needs.” from the report
Improving leadership
The newer management team improved communication, encouraged staff to report problems and gave the service closer oversight of risks.
“We found evidence of improvements initiated by the management team such as greater oversight of risk to people using the service and transparency when things went wrong.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingPeople did not always have activities that matched their interests or needs. Staff said they often had too little time to provide activities alongside care duties.
“People were not always consistently provided with activities which were meaningful to them.” from the report
Checks missed problems
needs fixingManagement audits did not identify some gaps in care records or the inconsistent support with activities. Inspectors recommended close oversight until improvements were established.
“Although there were management systems in place, we found these did not always identify concerns and areas for improvement found at this inspection.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager when inspectors visited. The provider was legally responsible for how the home was run until one was registered.
“At the time of inspection, there was no registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What activities are now available that are based on my relative's interests, needs and preferences?
- 02How do you make sure staff have enough time to provide activities as well as personal care?
- 03What checks are now in place to find missing or incomplete care records?
- 04Has a registered manager now taken up the post and completed registration?
- 05Is the embargo on new admissions still in place, and what improvements must be completed before it is lifted?
This was a focused inspection prompted by concerns about nutrition monitoring, social activities and staff culture; Safe, Responsive and Well-led were inspected, while the other key question ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 August 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, August 2019
Ridgemount was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 18 July 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They also reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from harm, received their medicines as prescribed, had enough staff support and were helped to access healthcare.
People described kind and respectful care. Their preferences were recorded in care plans, and they had access to activities, visitors and support to maintain relationships. The home also had systems for handling complaints and learning from incidents.
The previous inspection in 2018 had rated the home Requires Improvement and found several breaches. Inspectors said those concerns had been addressed and that the home was no longer in breach of regulations.
Improvements since 2018
Inspectors found that the concerns from the previous inspection had been addressed. Staffing, medicines management and links with healthcare professionals had improved.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.” from the report
Safe staffing
There were enough staff to meet people's needs. A new staff allocation system helped ensure breaks were covered and staff remained available.
“There were enough staff to meet the needs of the people who used this service.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw positive relationships and respectful interactions. Staff took time to talk with people and supported their dignity and independence.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff, who had the time to build positive relationships with them.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in activities such as arts and crafts, trips out, baking and exercise. There were no restrictions on when friends and family could visit.
“Peoples access to activities had increased since our last inspection, and there was now a wider variety of things they could partake in.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are staffing levels and staff break cover arranged now?
- 02How are medicines records and storage temperatures checked?
- 03How often are care plans reviewed and updated when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 04What activities are currently available, including one-to-one activities and trips out?
- 05How can residents and relatives raise complaints, and how are the outcomes shared?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, and the report says the previous Requires Improvement ratings were reassessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 August 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 Ridgemount
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- August 2021Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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.