CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Riverside Care Complex
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured the home had effective infection prevention and control measures.
This was a planned, announced inspection on 19 August 2020. It was a targeted review of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, shielding, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and possible outbreaks safely. They were also assured that the infection control policy was up to date.
The home was not given an overall quality rating. Safe was recorded as inspected but not rated, so this report does not judge the wider quality of care.
Activities and avoiding isolation
The home organised activities safely during social distancing restrictions. This included an event in the grounds.
“A dedicated activities coordinator organised meaningful activities within the home to prevent isolation.” from the report
Contact with relatives
Staff helped people maintain contact with their families, including through photographs and video calls.
“Staff worked to ensure people maintained meaningful contact with relatives.” from the report
Information for staff
Staff said information about changes to infection prevention and control was shared effectively through senior carers.
“Staff praised the effective way in which the registered manager disseminated information to them” from the report
Adapted environment
The layout was changed to support social distancing while keeping the home warm and homely.
“The layout of the home had been subtly adapted to allow people to socially distance” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 19 August 2020?
- 02How do you currently manage visits from relatives and other visitors?
- 03How do you support people to keep in contact with their families if visits are restricted?
- 04How do you test people using the service and staff when required?
- 05How do you identify and manage a possible infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; it was not a full assessment of the home's quality of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 September 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.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Derwent House Residential Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found improved care, but staffing, risk records and quality monitoring still needed attention.
Inspectors visited on 7 and 9 January 2020. The first visit was unannounced. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, and checked care records, medicines, training, recruitment, complaints and other documents.
The home had improved since its previous inadequate rating. Inspectors found people were generally safe, received medicines on time, and were treated with kindness and respect. Care was more personalised, and staff supported people's choices, activities and contact with relatives.
There were still important weaknesses. People, relatives and staff raised concerns about staffing levels. Some risk assessments, care plans and other records were incomplete or not up to date. The quality monitoring systems had not found all of these problems.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe and well-led were Requires Improvement, while effective, caring and responsive were Good. The home was no longer rated inadequate and was no longer in special measures.
Improved care
Inspectors found that the quality of care had improved since the previous inspection. Care and support were more closely matched to people's needs and preferences.
“The standards of care provided to people had improved since the last inspection.” from the report
Medicines and health
People received their medicines when they should. The home obtained and followed advice from health professionals.
“Medicines arrangements were safe and managed appropriately; people received their medicines when they should.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were listened to, treated with dignity and supported to remain as independent as possible.
“People were treated with kindness; they were actively listened to and their choices respected.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were offered activities suited to their interests and abilities. Visitors were welcomed without time restrictions.
“People engaged in activities in the home and in the local community.” from the report
Staffing levels
seriousPeople, relatives and staff said there were not always enough staff to meet people's needs. The provider agreed to increase staffing during the inspection.
“Feedback from people, relatives and staff; and records of complaints told us that there was not always enough staff available to meet people's needs.” from the report
Risk and care records
seriousSome risk information and care plans did not contain enough detail or were not easy to locate. One care plan was updated during the inspection after inspectors raised a concern.
“Some records were not available or up to date to support people's holistic needs and keep them safe from risk.” from the report
Time for meaningful contact
needs fixingSome staff said staffing pressures made them focus on tasks and reduced the time available for conversations with people.
“Some staff felt staffing levels kept them task focused and they were unable to spend much meaningful time with people.” from the report
- 01What staffing numbers are now in place, and how do you check they are enough for people's needs?
- 02How do you make sure every person's risk assessment and care plan is complete, current and available to all staff?
- 03What action has been taken about the risk information and care records that inspectors found incomplete?
- 04How are audit action plans recorded, updated and checked to make sure improvements are completed?
- 05How will you make sure staff have enough time for meaningful conversation and activities with people?
This was a planned inspection of all five CQC questions, following the previous inadequate rating and special measures status. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 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 Riverside Care Complex
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2019Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
37 live-in carers within about an hour of York
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 £1,270 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.