CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rose Farm House
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Outstanding
- People were protected by strong safeguarding and risk management. Staff reduced distress, physical interventions and restrictions, and medicines were regularly reviewed.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not rated in this inspection report.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not rated in this inspection report, although inspectors described staff as respectful and person-centred.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not rated in this inspection report, although inspectors found that people's goals, wishes and individual needs were supported.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Leadership was described as exceptional. There was a positive, inclusive culture, and staff used incidents, meetings and feedback to improve support.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Overall rating Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally safe, person-centred care and strong leadership.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 November 2021. One inspector spoke with two people, six staff members, two relatives and a healthcare professional. Records about care, medicines, staffing and management were also checked.
The inspection was prompted partly by concerns about restrictions on people and a possible closed culture. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns.
People had made significant progress. Staff helped reduce distress, physical interventions and medicines, while supporting people to gain independence, try new activities and achieve personal goals. Infection prevention and control arrangements were also found to be effective.
The overall rating was Outstanding. Safe and Well-led were both rated Outstanding. The report did not give ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive, so this inspection does not provide a new rating for those areas.
Reduced distress and restraint
Staff learned what caused distress and changed their approach. This reduced incidents and the need for physical intervention.
“People had been supported to reduce the frequency and severity of their behaviour of distress through staff adapting their approach and learning lessons on how to support people more effectively.” from the report
Greater independence
People were supported to gain skills, manage money, take part in safety checks and reduce the support they needed for activities.
“Staff worked in very close partnership with people to take positive risks which resulted in people trying new activities, acquiring new skills and growing in confidence.” from the report
Careful medicines support
Staff worked with healthcare professionals to reduce unnecessary medicines without increasing distress. One person was supported towards managing their own medicines.
“People had been supported to review and reduce medicines they were taking.” from the report
Strong leadership and learning
Managers understood their responsibilities and used incidents, staff meetings and feedback to improve care. Relatives were kept informed.
“Staff and the registered manager demonstrated a positive culture within the service which supported people to achieve their goals.” from the report
Good health partnerships
The home worked closely with healthcare professionals and created plans to speed up access to specialist help when people's health needs changed.
“Staff and the registered manager had exceptional collaborative relationships with healthcare professionals, which enabled great outcomes for people.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently monitor whether distress, incidents and physical interventions remain reduced?
- 02How are people involved in reviewing restrictions and planning to become more independent?
- 03How are medicines reviewed with healthcare professionals, and are any people still taking medicines to manage distress?
- 04How do you make sure new staff understand each person's triggers, care plan and any approved physical intervention techniques?
- 05How are relatives kept informed about changes in care and involved in decisions?
This inspection examined Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the report did not give new ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 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, September 2018
Rose Farm House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with communication still needing to improve.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 11 and 12 July 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. They observed care, checked support plans, medicines, staff records, complaints and safety information.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were treated kindly, supported to make choices and helped to build independence. Medicines were managed safely, staff were suitably trained and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
The home had improved since the previous inspection in June 2017, when it was rated Requires Improvement and breached regulations about risk, improper treatment and record keeping. Risks and restrictive practices had been reviewed, records were up to date and quality checks were now effective.
Inspectors identified one area still needing attention. Relatives and professionals said information about incidents, safeguarding outcomes and feedback was not always shared promptly. A new communication process had been introduced, but its effectiveness had not yet been tested.
Reduced restrictive practice
The home had reviewed restraint and reduced its use. Where high-risk restraint remained, it was assessed, agreed in advance and reviewed.
“The use of restraint had been agreed in advance with the relevant health and social care professionals and people's relatives.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans described people's needs, preferences and goals in detail. Staff helped people work towards greater independence and new skills.
“People's support plans were personalised and were based on their needs, choices and personal goals.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff listening to people, responding calmly when they were upset and respecting their choices, privacy and dignity.
“We observed staff talking to people and making eye contact with them sitting down and talking to them on their level.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were stored securely and records were complete. Staff training and competence checks were up to date.
“Medicine administration records (MARs) were complete and up to date with no gaps.” from the report
Improved management checks
The manager used audits to find problems, record actions and check that improvements were made.
“At this inspection the provider had taken the necessary steps to improve and that auditing of the service was now of the standard required.” from the report
Communication was not always prompt
needs fixingRelatives and health and social care professionals said information about incidents, safeguarding outcomes and feedback was not always shared quickly. A new process had started, but the home had not yet measured whether it worked.
“The strategy developed was new and the service had not had time to test to see if this had improved communication with relatives and professionals.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure relatives receive timely information about incidents and safeguarding outcomes?
- 02How have you measured whether the new communication strategy is working?
- 03If my relative needs restraint or other restrictive support, how will you assess, agree, review and reduce it?
- 04How often will my relative's support and risk plans be reviewed if their needs change?
- 05How will you involve my relative and our family in decisions about support, activities and independence goals?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care and premises provided by the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 September 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.
Every inspection of Rose Farm House
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- December 2021Outstandingcurrent ratingup from GoodSafe: OutstandingEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- September 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 January 2011.
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.