CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rockliffe Court limited
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about PPE, visits, admissions, social distancing and the infection-control policy. They were only somewhat assured about staff testing, the premises and the accuracy of cleaning records.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, October 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements, but some testing and cleaning records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 06 October 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors were assured about visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, the infection-control policy and visits. They found enough PPE, stored safely, and staff had training in its use.
The home was only somewhat assured about staff testing, the premises and cleaning records. Staff lateral flow tests were not always registered as required, some cleaning was not recorded accurately, and redecoration work was still ongoing.
Personal protective equipment
The home had enough PPE, stored it safely and staff had training to use it.
“The service had sufficient supply of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) which was stored safely.” from the report
Managing COVID risks
Separate areas were available to help manage staff and people who were COVID positive.
“Separate areas were available to enable effective zoning and cohorting of staff when people were COVID positive” from the report
Staff testing records
needs fixingStaff lateral flow tests were not being registered on the Government website in line with current guidance. The manager said a new system was being introduced.
“Lateral flow tests for staff were not registered on the Government website in line with current guidance.” from the report
Cleaning records
needs fixingSome cleaning was not recorded accurately, including cleaning of office equipment and high-touch points. The manager said more information would be added to the documents.
“Not all cleaning was recorded accurately, for example office equipment and high touch points.” from the report
Redecoration work
minorImprovement work to redecorate the environment was still continuing. The remaining work was included in an action plan.
“Improvement works continued to be made regarding the redecoration of the environment.” from the report
- 01How are staff lateral flow tests now registered and checked?
- 02How do you record cleaning of office equipment and high-touch points, and who checks these records?
- 03Which redecoration works remained outstanding after the inspection, and have they now been completed?
- 04What systems are in place to prevent and manage infection outbreaks?
- 05How are visits and social distancing arrangements kept in line with current guidance?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 October 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, June 2021
Rockliffe Court limited was rated Requires Improvement; safety and management had improved, but some checks and records still needed strengthening.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 8 April 2021. Inspectors spoke with six people, three relatives, five staff and a health professional. They reviewed care records, medicine records, recruitment files and management records.
The home had improved since its previous inspection. Inspectors found better cleanliness, safer risk management, improved care records, regular fire drills and suitable staffing. People and relatives said they felt safe and had seen positive changes.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe and Well-led were both rated Requires Improvement. Medicines were being managed safely, but medicine audits did not always record actions needed. Some personal emergency evacuation plans also needed more detail, and management systems needed to become more consistent.
The previous rating was Inadequate, with multiple breaches, and the home had been in Special Measures. Inspectors found the home was no longer in breach of regulations and was no longer in Special Measures, but CQC said it would continue to monitor the service.
Improved cleanliness
The environment was visibly cleaner, with rooms redecorated and old furniture removed. Infection control measures were in place and staff used protective equipment safely.
“People were protected from the risk of infection.” from the report
Safer care systems
Staff understood safeguarding procedures, accident reporting and fire safety. Risk assessments and care records had improved.
“The improvements made since the last inspection has supported people to feel safe.” from the report
Enough staff
Staffing levels met people's needs, and recruitment checks were in place to make sure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
“Appropriate staffing levels were in place to meet the needs of people in the service.” from the report
Positive changes
People and relatives spoke positively about changes at the home, including improvements to rooms and management. Staff training and supervision were up to date.
“There have been a lot of improvements made since the last inspection, my family member loves their new room, the carers are lovely, and the new management team are more approachable.” from the report
Medicine audit records
needs fixingMedicines were managed safely, but monthly audits did not always show what action was needed. CQC recommended reviewing medicine record keeping.
“However, monthly audits did not always contain information relating to any actions required.” from the report
Evacuation plans
needs fixingPersonal emergency evacuation plans were in place and up to date, but some did not contain enough detail about people's individual needs.
“However, some required more detail to ensure staff had the relevant information to support people’s individual needs.” from the report
Consistency of management
needs fixingManagement oversight had improved, but the report said further work was needed to make systems consistent and continuous.
“Further improvements were required to ensure consistency and continuity.” from the report
- 01How do you record and follow up actions identified in monthly medicine audits?
- 02Can you show me how my relative's personal emergency evacuation plan reflects their individual needs?
- 03How are managers checking that the improvements found at this inspection are being maintained?
- 04What recent checks have been made on care records, accidents, safeguarding concerns and other safety risks?
- 05How will you tell families if further problems are found or if the service is inspected again?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection focused on Safe and Well-led; the report did not give ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 June 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 Rockliffe Court limited
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- October 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2021Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2021Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 May 2013.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Kingston upon Hull, City of
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 £1,020 to £1,350 a week. 12 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“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.