CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rosedale Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and regularly reviewed, medicines were managed safely, infection controls were effective and there were enough staff. The home was no longer in breach of Regulation 12.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management oversight, regular quality checks and a more open, person-centred culture. The home was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Rosedale Centre was rated Good; inspectors found safer care and stronger management after previous shortfalls.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 1 and 2 November 2022. Inspectors checked whether improvements had been made in Safe and Well-led after the previous inspection. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely, infection controls were effective and there were enough staff. People and relatives said they felt safe. The home also had better checks on quality, clearer management oversight and a more open culture.
The overall rating was Good. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
Risks were managed
Risks were assessed, reviewed as people's needs changed and managed by staff. People and relatives said they felt safe.
“Risks to people had been assessed, and safety was monitored and well managed within the service.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs promptly. Staff were described as unhurried when providing help.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and managed safely. Staff were trained and people had protocols for medicines needed only when required.
“Systems now supported safe medicines storage and management.” from the report
Stronger leadership
Management had clearer oversight and used audits to identify and act on improvements. Staff said the culture had improved.
“The provider and the registered manager had clear and effective oversight of the service.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, the use of protective equipment and the home's ability to respond to infection risks.
“We were assured that the provider was responding effectively to risks and signs of infection.” from the report
Further improvements planned
minorThe home still had planned improvements covering the environment, incident recording systems and policy reviews. The report does not say these plans amounted to a breach.
“Ongoing improvements were planned which included improvements to the environment, incident recording systems and reviews of policies.” from the report
- 01What improvements have been made to the environment since the inspection?
- 02How are incidents and accidents recorded now, and how is learning shared with staff?
- 03How are risks and care plans reviewed when a person's needs change?
- 04How are medicines that people take only when needed assessed, recorded and reviewed?
- 05What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous comprehensive inspection?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 November 2022 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, July 2021
Rosedale Centre was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks in medicines, records, fire safety and infection control.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 7 June 2021. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was not always safe. Some risks were not assessed properly, medicines records were incomplete, fire drills had not been recorded since 2019, and staff were not consistently following COVID-19 infection control procedures. Staff also said there were not enough workers at night.
The home was not always well-led. Audits had not found the problems inspectors identified, and records were incomplete or difficult to find. The overall rating fell from Good in 2017 to Requires Improvement.
Safeguarding awareness
People said they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding procedures and knew how to report and escalate concerns.
“Staff were knowledgeable around safeguarding procedures and where to report and escalate any concerns.” from the report
Safe recruitment
Inspectors found that recruitment processes followed safe practices.
“The were safe recruitment practices in place.” from the report
Supportive management
Staff said the manager listened to them and was supportive. People and relatives were also positive about how the home was managed.
“Staff said the registered manager listens to them and is supportive.” from the report
Rehabilitation support
People were supported to be as independent as possible, often with a consistent staff team. Inspectors heard that rehabilitation had helped one person become more mobile.
“People were supported to be as independent as they could be by the same continuous staff team where possible.” from the report
Unmanaged care risks
seriousNot all risks had a care plan or risk assessment. One person on a soft diet was still given high-risk foods.
“One person was on a soft diet, a risk assessment was in place, however they were still provided with high risk foods, such as sausages and pies.” from the report
Medicines procedures
seriousThere were no protocols for some medicines given when needed, topical cream records were incomplete, and staff were not following the provider's policy.
“Staff were not following the providers policy when administering medicines.” from the report
Fire safety records
seriousThe home could not show that fire drills had taken place since 2019.
“There were no records to evidence fire drills had taken place since 2019.” from the report
Infection control
seriousStaff did not always wear masks correctly or at all, and full checks were not carried out on people arriving at the home.
“However staff were not following these systems, not all staff were wearing masks, either correctly or at all, and there were no full checks on people arriving at the service.” from the report
Weak oversight
needs fixingAudits did not identify the problems inspectors found. Records were incomplete, unavailable or difficult to find, and care plans did not always reflect current needs.
“Audit systems were not robust enough to identify the shortfalls we found.” from the report
Night staffing
needs fixingStaff said there were not enough workers at night and that one unit could be left without staff while another was supported. The manager said funding was available for another night team.
“We often have to leave one unit with no staff whilst we support another unit where two staff are needed.” from the report
- 01What has changed in the way you assess and record risks, including risks linked to soft diets?
- 02How do you now check that staff follow medicines policies and complete all medicines records?
- 03When was the last fire drill, and how often are drills now carried out?
- 04How do you ensure staff wear masks correctly and complete checks on people arriving at the home?
- 05Have extra night staff been recruited, and how do you prevent a unit being left without staff?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 July 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 Rosedale Centre
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014Inspected but not rated
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 March 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
45 live-in carers within about an hour of Stockton-on-Tees
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 £1,190 a week. 40 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.