CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rose House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2017
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found the home Requires Improvement for well-led arrangements.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 02 August 2017. The inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, advocates and care managers. Records, medicines, staff files, rotas, audits and policies were also checked.
The four care areas were rated Good. Inspectors found people were safe, received suitable health support, were treated kindly and had care plans based on their needs and preferences. People were supported with activities, choice and greater independence.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for being well-led. There was no manager registered with CQC, although an application had been made. The provider had not returned information requested before the inspection, and staff supervision meetings had not taken place as regularly as the provider's policy required.
The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection on 25 August 2015. The report says the manager had plans to restart regular supervision and that the CQC registration application was progressing.
Safe medicines systems
Medicines were stored securely and records were clear, with no gaps found in the administration records inspected.
“Medicines were managed well which helped to keep people safe from errors being made.” from the report
Kind and familiar staff
People appeared relaxed with staff, and staff knew their personalities, preferences and support needs well.
“People were comfortable and relaxed in their surroundings.” from the report
Person-centred care
Care plans recorded people's life histories, likes, dislikes, communication methods and goals. People were involved in their care planning as far as possible.
“Care plans were person centred, including all the important personal information about the person” from the report
Activities and choice
People took part in activities and outings that matched their interests and abilities, including holidays, shopping, music and movement, arts and crafts.
“People enjoyed activities both inside and outside of the service.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere had been no CQC-registered manager since May 2016. An application had been made and was progressing during the inspection.
“The service did not have a manager in place who was registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
Information was not returned
needs fixingThe provider did not return the provider information return by the date requested by CQC.
“The provider had not submitted information requested by CQC prior to the inspection.” from the report
- 01Has a manager now registered with CQC, and when was the application completed?
- 02Are one-to-one staff supervision meetings now taking place at the frequency set out in the provider's policy?
- 03Have the staff vacancies mentioned in the report been filled, and how are staffing levels maintained when there are shortages?
- 04Are copies of all provider audits now kept at the home and shared promptly with the manager?
- 05How are people involved in recording their views and involvement when they cannot sign their care plans?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the previous overall Good rating from 25 August 2015 was maintained. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 October 2017 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 House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 April 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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Medway
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.