Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Rose Cottage

Goodpublished 29 December 2018, 7 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors were assured that the home had safe infection prevention and control arrangements, including visitor management, admissions, testing, hygiene and outbreak management.
Effective?
Good
This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
Caring?
Good
This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
Responsive?
Good
This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
Well-led?
Good
This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2020

Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.

This was an announced, targeted inspection on 20 October 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.

Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, new admissions, testing, hygiene, the building layout 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 or a rating for safe care. This report does not assess the full range of care or services.

What inspectors praised
  • Infection control

    Inspectors were assured that the home was taking steps to prevent and manage infections, including possible outbreaks.

    “We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
  • Support from health professionals

    The managers said they could get advice and up-to-date information from local clinical and infection control leads.

    “The registered managers said these leads were contactable for advice, up-to-date guidance and best practice information.” from the report
  • Communication with people and staff

    The home had increased meetings so people and staff could raise concerns and ask questions about COVID-19.

    “This enabled staff and people to discuss any concerns or ask any questions they may have had about COVID-19.” from the report
  • Safer group activities

    Activities were arranged in smaller groups to support social distancing.

    “Activities were done in smaller group sessions to promote social distancing.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Further development suggested

    minor

    Inspectors signposted the home to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not say that this amounted to a breach.

    “We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you keep your infection prevention and control policy up to date?
  2. 02How do you test residents and staff when testing is needed?
  3. 03What checks are made before a new resident is admitted?
  4. 04How do you manage visitors to prevent infections being brought into or spread around the home?
  5. 05What is your plan for managing an infection outbreak?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 October 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2018

Rose Cottage was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but some safety records were not completed.

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 29 and 30 November 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a visiting community nurse. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files, training records, complaints and management checks.

The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines practice, kind care, personalised support and good links with health professionals.

There was one record-keeping concern. Checks for bed rails had not always been recorded, sometimes for more than 10 days. Records used to monitor people's risks had also not always been completed, and the management checks had not identified this. Managers said they would act promptly.

What inspectors praised
  • Enough skilled staff

    Inspectors found enough staff with the skills needed to support people safely. Staff responded promptly when people asked for help.

    “There were enough staff with the necessary skills to support people.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    Staff were observed to be patient, affectionate and respectful. They supported privacy and dignity during personal care.

    “Throughout the day we observed care interactions which were kind and patient and showed sincere affection for people.” from the report
  • Personalised support

    People were involved in decisions about their care and supported to follow their interests, remain independent and take part in activities.

    “People received a service that was tailored to their individual needs and they led fulfilling lives.” from the report
  • Safe medicines practice

    Medicines were stored and administered safely by trained staff. Records showed they were given as prescribed.

    “Medicines were managed safely by trained and competent staff who administered people's medicines as prescribed.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Bed rail checks not recorded

    needs fixing

    In all four relevant care plans inspected, required bed rail checks were not recorded. Some checks had been missing for more than 10 days, creating a potential safety risk even though inspectors found no impact on people.

    “There were several occasions where the recording of these checks had not been completed for over 10 days.” from the report
  • Risk records not consistently monitored

    needs fixing

    Records used to monitor people's risks had not always been completed since the service was registered. The management system had not identified this as an improvement area.

    “Records to monitor people's risks had not always been completed and this had not been identified as an area for improvement.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How are bed rail checks recorded now, and who checks that no records are missed?
  2. 02What changes were made after inspectors found risk records had not always been completed?
  3. 03How often are care plans and risk records audited, and can families see evidence of these checks?
  4. 04How are staffing levels adjusted when people's needs change or when activities take place?
  5. 05How will you involve us in reviewing our relative's care and preferences?

This was an unannounced first comprehensive inspection under the home's current registration and covered all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 December 2018 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Rose Cottage

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. October 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at Rose Cottage →

  2. December 2018Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Rose Cottage →

  3. March 2018

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 March 2018.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire

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 £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.

See live-in carers near CambridgeshireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.