CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Rockdale House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and medicines, staffing, recruitment and infection control were managed safely. Inspectors found some care plans did not contain all the risk information staff needed.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward, although people and relatives gave positive feedback about the care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management checks and audits were effective overall, and the manager acted quickly when inspectors raised issues. Some improvements were still needed in risk management, wound care, pressure damage prevention and record keeping.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rockdale House rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-led care but some risk records and clinical notes were incomplete.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 16 and 17 May 2023. Inspectors looked at Safe and Well-led after concerns about pressure damage and skin care. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed the home and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were happy with their care. Inspectors found medicines, staffing, recruitment, safeguarding and infection control were managed well.
There were some gaps in care planning and record keeping. For example, some records did not explain catheter risks, the correct hoist sling or how to support someone with depression. Records of advice from health professionals were also not always complete.
The overall Good rating did not change. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe and were positive about the support provided. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns.
“People told us they felt safe living at the home and were happy with the care provided by staff.” from the report
Medicines were managed safely
Staff who gave medicines had training and regular competency checks. People said medicines were given on time and pain relief was available when needed.
“Medicines were managed safely and there was appropriate clinical oversight in place.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough qualified staff to support people safely and found that recruitment checks and induction were thorough.
“Staff were safely recruited and there were enough qualified and competent staff to safely support people.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff were asked for their views. The manager was described as approachable, and meetings gave people opportunities to raise ideas or concerns.
“There were regular residents and relatives' meetings and people told us they felt comfortable sharing any ideas or concerns.” from the report
Incomplete risk information
needs fixingSome care plans were not up to date or did not contain enough detail for staff to support people safely. Missing information included catheter risks, the correct hoist sling and how depression affected a person.
“Risks people may face were not always fully assessed, reviewed or mitigated.” from the report
Health professional records
seriousThere was no reliable system for recording advice from health professionals. This meant actions, changes in condition and next steps were not always recorded and put people at risk.
“This put people at risk. The registered manager and Head of Care began putting processes in place to improve record keeping of professional visits during the inspection.” from the report
Some staff availability concerns
minorSome people and relatives said there could be more staff at night and at weekends, although inspectors found staffing levels were safe overall.
“However, some people and their relatives commented that there could be more staff specifically at nights and on weekends.” from the report
- 01How have you updated care plans to include catheter risks, hoist sling details and guidance about depression?
- 02How do you now record advice, actions and follow-up from GPs and other health professionals?
- 03What training has been completed on risk management, wound care and pressure damage prevention?
- 04How many staff are normally on duty at night and at weekends, and how do you respond if needs increase?
- 05What changes have been made through the new computer system to improve record keeping?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the last comprehensive inspection, published on 18 October 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 August 2023 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found arrangements to prevent and control COVID-19 infection.
The CQC carried out an unannounced, targeted inspection on 24 February 2021. It checked the home's infection prevention and control arrangements during the coronavirus pandemic. The home supported 31 older people and could accommodate up to 50.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, supported testing, followed shielding and social distancing rules, and had arrangements for safe admissions. They also found risk assessments for people and staff at higher risk.
The home had a separate meeting room for family visits, a visitor coordinator and a detailed cleaning schedule. This inspection was marked "Inspected but not rated", so it did not give an overall quality rating.
Family visits
The home created a separate meeting room for visits and appointed a visitor coordinator to help organise visits and communicate with families.
“An enclosed meeting room was created for people to meet with family and friends. This had a separate entrance, minimising the risk of infection spread.” from the report
Testing arrangements
People living at the home, staff and visitors were supported with COVID-19 testing. A member of staff was specifically assigned to help with testing.
“People, staff and visitors were supported with testing for COVID-19.” from the report
Protective equipment
The home provided protective equipment to visitors and residents, and inspectors were assured that it was being used safely and effectively.
“The manager provided personal protective equipment to visitors and residents.” from the report
Cleaning and risk checks
There was a detailed cleaning schedule covering visitor areas and frequently touched surfaces. Risk assessments were also in place for people and staff at higher risk.
“A comprehensive cleaning schedule was in place in the home to minimise the risk of infection spread, this included visitor and high touch areas.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people, staff and visitors currently supported with COVID-19 or other infection testing?
- 02How does the home currently arrange family visits, and is a separate visiting room still used?
- 03How often are visitor areas and high-touch surfaces cleaned, and how is this checked?
- 04How are risk assessments reviewed for people and staff in higher-risk groups?
- 05What is the home's current overall CQC rating, given that this inspection was not rated?
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and did not provide an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 March 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.
Every inspection of Rockdale House
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.