CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Riverhead Hall Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely, infection controls were in place, and staffing and recruitment were safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive leadership, person-centred values, effective quality checks and timely notifications. They recommended making records more accessible to staff.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Riverhead Hall Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with further work needed on record systems.
This was an unannounced focused inspection over three visits. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records, and observed care.
People told inspectors they felt safe and were happy with the home. Risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely, infection controls were in place, and staffing was described as sufficient. Inspectors also found positive, person-centred leadership and systems that supported improvements.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement and had breached regulations. Inspectors found enough improvement for those breaches to be ended. They recommended making records easier for staff to access. The overall rating is Good, but the other care questions were not inspected during this visit and their ratings were carried forward.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe and that staff responded when support was needed.
“People were happy and felt safe at the service.” from the report
Sufficient staffing
Staffing was based on people's needs. Inspectors found staff were deployed effectively and feedback suggested staffing levels were sufficient.
“Staff were deployed effectively to support people in line with their needs and preferences.” from the report
Positive leadership
The management team promoted person-centred care and used checks and lessons learned to improve the service.
“Quality assurance processes were followed and supported the service to make improvements where needed.” from the report
Records need to be easier to use
minorInspectors found that further work was needed to streamline recording systems so staff could find and follow information more easily.
“Further work was required to ensure that the current recording systems in place were streamlined to make information more accessible to staff.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to streamline the recording systems since the inspection?
- 02How do you make sure staff can quickly find and follow the latest risk assessments and care information?
- 03How are medicines records audited, and what happens when recording concerns are found?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels continue to match people's changing needs?
- 05What were the previous issues with notifications to CQC, and how do you now make sure they are submitted on time?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 November 2022 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, February 2022
Riverhead Hall Residential Care Home: inspected but not rated; inspectors found improved infection control, with some PPE, policy and record-keeping gaps.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 13 January 2022. This was a targeted inspection because of COVID-19 outbreaks in care homes. They looked mainly at infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures.
The home had improved its infection control since the last inspection. Inspectors found the building clean and well maintained. Visits were allowed under national guidance, staff were vaccinated and regularly tested, and COVID-19 risks were assessed.
Some areas were not fully consistent. Inspectors were only somewhat assured about the safe use of PPE and the infection control policy. Some cleaning records were incomplete. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full overall judgement.
Improved infection control
Inspectors found that infection prevention and control practices had improved since the last inspection. The building was clean and well maintained.
“The provider had made improvements to infection prevention and control (IPC) practices since our last inspection.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
People could receive visitors in line with national guidance. A visiting pod was also available if alternative arrangements were needed.
“People could have visitors in line with national guidance.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
Staff were vaccinated and took part in regular testing. The home also assessed COVID-19 risks for people and staff.
“Staff were vaccinated and took part in regular testing. They wore personal protective equipment to minimise risk of infections potentially spreading.” from the report
PPE use
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured that PPE was being used effectively and safely. The provider was signposted to guidance about PPE use.
“We were somewhat assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Infection control policy
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured that the policy was up to date and being followed effectively.
“We were somewhat assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date and implemented effectively.” from the report
Cleaning records
minorSome cleaning records had not been completed fully. The provider took prompt action to address this and other minor inconsistencies.
“The provider took prompt action to address a small number of minor areas where aspects of policy or best practice were not being followed consistently, or where cleaning records were not completed fully.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that staff use PPE effectively and safely?
- 02When was the infection prevention and control policy last updated, and how do you check that staff follow it?
- 03How are laundering arrangements managed and recorded?
- 04How do you make sure cleaning equipment for reusable items is available and used correctly?
- 05How have staffing pressures affected the service, and what measures are in place to manage them?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; it did not assess the other four key questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 2022 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 Riverhead Hall Residential Care Home
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Riverhead Hall Residential Care Home →
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Riverhead Hall Residential Care Home →
- October 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.