CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Risedale Rest Home Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using PPE safely, supporting testing, and following shielding and social distancing rules. They were also assured that the infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
- 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, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place.
This was a targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inspectors checked how the home prevented and controlled infections. The visit was announced.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened, PPE was used safely, testing was available, and social distancing and shielding rules were followed. They were also assured that the home had suitable cleaning, hygiene and infection control arrangements.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a rated score for the five questions.
Visitor safety checks
Visitors had their temperature checked and answered relevant questions before entering the home.
“All visitors had to undergo a temperature check and answer a range of relevant questions before entry.” from the report
PPE and hygiene
The home had enough PPE, handwashing facilities and signs about handwashing.
“There were ample PPE, handwashing facilities and signage, particularly regarding handwashing.” from the report
Up-to-date guidance
The manager understood changing national guidance and made sure staff and residents were told about relevant changes.
“The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of changing national guidance and ensured staff and people who used the service were made aware of relevant changes.” from the report
Continuity of care
The home had not used agency staff and had individual risk assessments to support social distancing and other government guidance.
“The service had not used agency staff and ensured people received a continuity of care.” from the report
Individual risk assessments
Risk assessments were in place to help residents and staff follow social distancing and other guidance.
“Individualised risk assessments were in place to help staff and people adhere to social distancing and other government guidance.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are visitors still temperature checked and asked relevant questions before entering?
- 02How do you currently provide PPE, handwashing facilities and infection control signage?
- 03How are residents and staff currently tested for infections?
- 04How are individual risk assessments reviewed when social distancing or other guidance changes?
- 05Are you still avoiding agency staff, and how do you maintain continuity of care?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 April 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
Risedale Rest Home Limited was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and major improvements since the previous inspection, with the laundry still needing attention.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 14 August 2019. One inspector spoke with six people, six staff members, two relatives and a social care professional. The inspector also checked five people's care plans, risk assessments and medicines records, as well as training, policies, audits and maintenance records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that care plans, risk assessments, daily records, medicines systems and the building had improved. People were described as safe, well cared for and involved in decisions about their care.
The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in September 2018. The provider was no longer in breach of regulations. Inspectors noted that the laundry still needed improvement, and some staff were not yet fully confident using the electronic care records system.
Improved care records
Care plans and risk assessments had been reviewed and made more personal and easier for staff to follow. Daily records were accurate and up to date.
“Care plans had been completely rewritten where necessary and reviewed on a continual basis.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely, including medicines given when needed and covert medicines. Audits and stock checks were described as consistent and comprehensive.
“Medicines were managed safely, in line with best practice.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and treated them warmly and sensitively. The report also noted that staff continuity helped people feel relaxed and at home.
“Feedback was positive regarding the compassionate, affectionate and sensitive approach of staff.” from the report
Better activities
Activities had improved, with group and one-to-one options such as baking and card games. A dedicated activities co-ordinator was in place.
“The planning and provision of activities had improved since the last inspection.” from the report
Strong management
The manager had maintained significant improvements and worked constructively with staff and outside professionals. Staff said they felt more involved and supported.
“The registered manager had maintained the significant positive improvements they had made at the last inspection.” from the report
Laundry still needed improvement
needs fixingAlthough much of the building had been improved, inspectors said the laundry remained an area needing attention. The manager agreed to pursue this as a priority with the owners.
“The laundry was still in need of improvement; the registered manager agreed to pursue these as a priority with the owners.” from the report
Some staff still learning the electronic records system
minorThe new electronic care records system was working well overall, but some staff were not yet fully proficient. Families should ask how staff competence is checked.
“The registered manager had implemented an electronic care records system, which was working well, although some staff were not yet fully proficient in it.” from the report
- 01What improvements have been made to the laundry since the inspection?
- 02How are staff trained and checked as competent in using the electronic care records system?
- 03How are people's views collected if they do not attend resident meetings or return surveys?
- 04What further end of life care training is now available to staff?
- 05How are activities tailored for people who prefer one-to-one support?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection covering all five key questions and checking action taken after the previous Requires Improvement rating. 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 Risedale Rest Home Limited
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 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
30 live-in carers within about an hour of North Tyneside
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 £950 to £1,130 a week. 26 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.