CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Riverside Rest Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safe medicines management, suitable staffing, thorough recruitment, infection-control measures and risk assessments. They recommended improvements to laundry practice and daily checks of some risk-monitoring records.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, clear management responsibilities and regular audits. Managers encouraged people and staff to give their views and worked with health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Riverside Rest Home was rated Good after a focused inspection; inspectors found safe, well-managed care but recommended improvements to the laundry arrangements.
The inspection took place on 14 April 2021 after concerns were received about personal care, staffing and staff training. Inspectors checked Safe and Well-led only. They spoke with one person, care staff and managers, and reviewed staffing, training, recruitment, care records and management records.
Inspectors found people were protected from harm. Medicines, staffing, recruitment, infection control and risk management were judged safe. They found no evidence that people were at risk of harm during this inspection.
The laundry was small and made it harder to follow good practice. Inspectors found no evidence that this had affected people's health or wellbeing, but recommended that the home seek guidance. They also advised managers to review some risk-monitoring records daily.
The overall rating was Good, as were Safe and Well-led. Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected at this visit, so their earlier ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Safe staffing
The home had enough suitably qualified staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were described as thorough.
“The management team ensured sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff were available to meet peoples' needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff managed medicines safely, including controlled drugs. Their skills were regularly checked and training was updated.
“Staff managed people's medication safely, including controlled drugs in line with the Misuse of Drugs Act (1971) and associated regulations.” from the report
Risk management
People's risks were assessed in their care plans, with guidance for staff. Emergency evacuation plans were also in place.
“Care plans were individual to the person and had guidance and strategies for staff on how to identify and manage their health risks.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found that managers encouraged views from people and staff. Regular audits helped managers monitor care and safety.
“The management team completed a wide range of audits on a regular basis.” from the report
Laundry arrangements
minorThe laundry was small and made it difficult to follow good practice. Inspectors recommended that the home seek guidance, although they found no evidence of harm.
“The laundry facility at the service was small and presented challenges in following good practice guidance.” from the report
Risk-monitoring records
needs fixingNew records such as turning, food and fluid charts were being used. Managers were advised to review them daily so the process became properly established.
“We advised management should review the new documentation daily to ensure the process was embedded and completed as intended.” from the report
- 01What guidance have you sought, and what changes have you made to the laundry arrangements?
- 02How are managers now checking the turning, food and fluid charts each day?
- 03What changes were made after the incident that led to the new call bell system?
- 04How do you check that medicines training and staff skills remain up to date?
- 05What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous comprehensive inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 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, February 2019
Riverside Rest Home was rated Good; inspectors found caring, safe support with a previous medicines-recording issue now improved.
This was a planned, comprehensive and unannounced inspection. One inspector reviewed the home, spoke with people living there, staff, management, a relative or friend and the cook, and checked care records, staffing, recruitment, medicines and safety documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were treated with kindness and respect, had care planned around their choices, and felt safe and listened to.
Staffing levels were considered appropriate. Medicines were managed safely, although audits had previously found that some medication records were not signed; the report says this had improved. The home had no complaints since the previous inspection.
The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection, published on 2 December 2016. This inspection found that the service remained Good overall.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff positively. Inspectors observed staff being kind, caring and patient, with attention to dignity and privacy.
“Staff were kind, caring and patient with people and this was observed throughout the inspection visit.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's physical, mental health, social and personal care needs, as well as their histories and preferences.
“Care records contained physical, mental health, social and personal care needs.” from the report
Safe staffing and risk support
The home had appropriate staffing arrangements, safe recruitment checks and risk assessments that were kept under review.
“People who lived at Riverside told us they felt enough staff were available to meet their needs.” from the report
Good management oversight
The management team used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor the service. Recent survey results were positive.
“Evidence demonstrated the registered manager had quality assurance processes that were effective and improved the service as intended.” from the report
Choice and activities
People were supported to make choices, remain as independent as possible and take part in social activities and entertainment.
“Staff organised a range of activities and regular outside entertainers to come into the home.” from the report
Medication records
minorAudits had found that medication documents were not always signed. Inspectors said recording had improved and found medicines were being managed safely at the inspection.
“audits had identified recording of medication documents had not always been signed and this had now improved.” from the report
- 01How do you check that every medication record is signed and complete?
- 02What staffing levels would be in place for my relative's needs, including at night?
- 03How would you update my relative's care plan when their needs, preferences or health change?
- 04What activities and opportunities for socialising would suit my relative?
- 05How would you involve the family in decisions if my relative could not make a particular decision?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC areas, including the premises and care provided; the report says the visit was unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 February 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 Riverside Rest Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 December 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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 £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.