CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rockny House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention procedures, PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing and safe admissions were in place. They were also assured that any outbreak could be managed effectively.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements, with some resources suggested to develop the approach.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 12 February 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found that the home had procedures to prevent infections spreading. They were assured about testing, personal protective equipment, social distancing, shielding, cleaning, safe admissions and managing possible outbreaks.
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through window visits, telephone calls and video calls. The home was clean and uncluttered, and staff were trained in infection prevention and control.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the areas checked.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had procedures to prevent people and staff acquiring and spreading infections.
“We were assured that the provider had procedures in place to prevent people and staff acquiring and spreading infections.” from the report
Clean premises
The premises were visually clean, hygienic and uncluttered. Cleaning schedules were being followed.
“The premises were visually clean, hygienic and uncluttered.” from the report
Contact with relatives
People could use pre-arranged window visits, telephone calls and video calls to stay in touch with family and friends.
“People and their relatives were supported to communicate by the use of pre- arranged window visits.” from the report
Safe admissions
A recent admission was managed with steps to reduce the risk of infection entering the home, including a separate entrance and self-isolation.
“The registered manager had taken appropriate steps to minimise any risks of infection being brought into the home.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorThe report says the provider was signposted to resources to develop its approach. It does not explain which parts needed development.
“We have signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What resources were you signposted to after the inspection, and what changes did you make as a result?
- 02How do you currently manage visits from relatives and external health care professionals?
- 03How are people, staff and visitors currently tested for infections?
- 04How do you make sure PPE is used safely and that staff follow infection prevention procedures?
- 05How do you manage new admissions and any infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not rate the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some plans to improve accessible reviews.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 11 December 2018. One inspector met people living in the home, observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, training and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training, kind relationships and care plans that reflected people's needs, wishes and cultural needs.
The rating stayed Good, as it had been at the January 2016 inspection. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns. They noted that evidence of people's involvement in care reviews was limited, and that the home planned to improve accessible information.
People felt safe
Staff understood how to recognise abuse and manage known risks. There were enough staff, and medicines were recorded clearly.
“People continued to receive care that made them feel safe and staff understood how to protect people from abuse and harm.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw warm, friendly relationships and staff who respected people's privacy, dignity and choices.
“On arrival at the home and throughout our visit it was clear that relationships between people who lived in the home and those who worked there were warm and friendly.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included detailed information about people's needs, wishes and cultural needs. Staff knew people well and supported their preferred activities.
“Care plans and detailed assessments were individual and contained a wealth of information about people, their needs, their wishes and cultural needs.” from the report
Good oversight
The management team used regular audits and checks covering care, safety and records. Staff spoke positively about the leadership.
“The audits were comprehensive and detailed and covered all aspects of the support and care provided.” from the report
Limited evidence of involvement in reviews
needs fixingPeople had been involved in reviews, but the records did not always show this clearly. The manager planned to use easy-read documents to help people take part more fully.
“Whilst people had been involved in the reviews evidence of their involvement was limited.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure each person can understand and take part in their care plan reviews?
- 02Have the planned easy-read documents and accessible communication systems now been introduced?
- 03How are people supported to raise complaints or concerns in a format they can understand?
- 04How do you maintain staffing levels when staff are absent through sickness or annual leave?
- 05How will you involve relatives in the planned face-to-face meetings about the quality of the service?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the January 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 January 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 Rockny House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 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 30 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Worcestershire
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. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.