CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rosedale House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staffing, recruitment, safeguarding, medicines and infection control arrangements were found to be suitable.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected in this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected in this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected in this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear leadership, regular quality checks, defined staff roles and an open approach to concerns and improvement.
What inspectors found, August 2022
Rosedale House is rated Good; inspectors found safe care, suitable staffing and strong management, with earlier safety shortfalls addressed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 05 August 2022. One inspector spoke with staff, a resident and relatives, observed care, and checked records about recruitment, risks, medicines, infection control and quality checks.
Safe was rated Good. Inspectors found that risks from legionella, portable radiators and people's medical conditions were now assessed and managed. Staff recruitment checks, staffing levels, safeguarding, medicines and infection control were also found to be safe.
Well-led was rated Good. The home had clear management arrangements, regular audits, staff handovers and good links with health and social care professionals. Relatives spoke positively about communication and the care provided.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led. The other key question ratings were not inspected and were carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection. The overall rating remained Good.
Improved safety checks
The home had put controls in place for legionella and risks from portable radiators. Risks linked to people's medical conditions were also fully recorded.
“Water safety checks to manage the risk of legionella continued to be in place.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were assessed regularly and that staff and relatives felt there were enough people to keep residents safe.
“Staff and relatives told us they felt the home had enough staff to keep people safe.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Medicines were stored securely, given as prescribed and recorded accurately. Staff administering medicines had relevant training.
“Medicines were managed consistently and safely in line with national guidance.” from the report
Clear management
Staff understood their responsibilities. The manager used audits, handovers and feedback to monitor and improve the service.
“There was a clear staffing structure and staff understood their roles.” from the report
Person-centred surroundings
The home had been refurbished with a focus on people living with dementia. Residents were involved in decisions about the decoration.
“This helped the staff to provide person centred care.” from the report
Fire brigade report awaited
minorThe local fire brigade had visited before the inspection, but the home was still waiting for its report and any required actions.
“The registered manager was awaiting their report to find out if any actions were needed.” from the report
- 01What was the outcome of the local fire brigade visit on 14 July 2022, and were any actions required?
- 02How are water safety checks for legionella completed and reviewed?
- 03How are risks linked to each resident's medical conditions recorded and updated?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels remain enough when staff are absent?
- 05Which ratings for Caring, Effective and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key question ratings were carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 August 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control overall, but managers were not always wearing masks correctly.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 9 February 2021. It followed concerns about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visitors, testing, social distancing, cleaning, PPE supplies and staff training. People could keep in touch with loved ones by phone and video call.
The inspectors were not fully assured that PPE was always used safely. Managers had been seen without masks, or too close together, in the office. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full quality rating.
Visitor safety
The home had clear entrance procedures. Visitors were limited to professionals during the outbreak, with infection control instructions and temperature checks.
“The home had designated entrance with posters displayed which explained the safety procedures in place.” from the report
Cleaning
Inspectors saw increased cleaning, including attention to frequently touched surfaces and communal areas.
“Increased cleaning of the home was taking place. This included regular cleaning of high touch areas such as door handles and light switches” from the report
PPE supplies and training
There was enough PPE for current and future demand. Staff had training in infection control and using PPE.
“The home had an adequate supply of personal protective equipment (PPE) to meet current and future demand.” from the report
Contact with loved ones
People could stay in touch with family and friends by telephone and video call while visits were restricted.
“People were able to communicate with loved ones by phone, and video call.” from the report
Masks in the office
needs fixingManagers had been seen without masks or too close to one another in the office. Inspectors raised this with the registered manager and signposted further resources.
“The registered manager and deputy manager had been observed by professionals not wearing masks or within a safe distance from each other.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors raised concerns about managers not wearing masks in the office?
- 02How do you now check that all staff and managers follow mask and distancing guidance?
- 03How often are high-touch areas and communal rooms cleaned?
- 04What arrangements are currently in place for visits and for people to contact their loved ones?
- 05How are staff trained and checked on infection control and putting on and removing PPE?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures, and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 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.
Every inspection of Rosedale House
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- July 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 November 2012.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“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.