CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rosedene
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and comfortable around staff. Inspectors found that risks, staffing, medicines, equipment, safeguarding and infection control were being monitored.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received training, supervision and feedback. People were supported with food and drink, healthcare appointments, decision-making and their individual health needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- People liked the staff and were treated with dignity and respect. Staff explained care, offered choices and supported people to be as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People's care was reviewed when their needs changed. They were supported with hobbies, interests, family relationships and complaints, and this area had improved since January 2016.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff knew and liked the registered manager. Care plans, medicines, equipment, the environment and infection control were checked and reviewed.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with activities and care planning improved since the previous inspection.
The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people with learning disabilities and autism. Five people were living there when inspectors visited.
Inspectors reviewed care plans, daily records, medicine records and management checks. They spoke with people, staff, family members and a health professional, and observed care. The inspection was unannounced and was brought forward after concerns were shared about how care concerns were understood and raised.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People appeared comfortable with staff, were involved in decisions, received support with health needs and medicines, and were helped to follow their interests.
The home had improved its activities and involvement in care since January 2016. The Responsive rating increased from Requires Improvement to Good. The other four ratings remained Good.
People felt safe
Staff understood people's risks and health conditions. Inspectors saw people at ease with staff and found that safety measures were reviewed.
“People were comfortable and at ease around care staff who understood how to keep people safe.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff involved people in day-to-day decisions and respected when they declined an activity or support. People were encouraged to do things they wanted to do.
“We saw that people's independence was promoted by staff.” from the report
Activities and interests
People were supported to take part in activities, hobbies and interests that suited them. This was an improvement from the previous inspection.
“Since our last inspection, the registered manager told us they had worked with people and their families to identify goals in terms of the hobbies and interests.” from the report
Care was kept up to date
Care plans were reviewed when people's needs changed. Staff were given updated information about how to support each person.
“Regular reviews of people's care ensured people's care planning was timely and up to date.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you support the person's particular health conditions, risks and need for supervision?
- 02What activities and hobbies could the person take part in, and how would their choices be recorded?
- 03How would you support the person's contact with family and important relationships?
- 04How would you involve the person in daily decisions and respect their choices if they declined care or an activity?
- 05How are medicine checks, care plan reviews and changes in the person's health communicated to staff?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service covering all five CQC areas; the report gives conflicting visit dates, listing 23 November 2017 on the front page and 26 November 2017 in the inspection details. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 March 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 Rosedene
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 November 2010.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Worcestershire
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. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“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.