CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rosegarth Residential
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 controls, but some cleaning and furniture problems needed attention.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 29 April 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The home supported visits from family and friends, including visits in the local community. Alternative contact arrangements were available if there was an outbreak. Inspectors were assured about testing, personal protective equipment, admissions, outbreak management and the infection control policy.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured about the cleanliness and layout of the premises. Some areas were not thoroughly cleaned and some furniture could no longer be cleaned effectively. The provider dealt with these issues during the inspection.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or other rating for the service.
Family visits
People could receive visits from family and friends, including visits in the local community. Alternative arrangements were available during an outbreak.
“People were supported to have visitors and safe visiting processes were followed in line with national guidance, including visits in the local community.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for testing, PPE, safe admissions and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Managing COVID-19 risks
Risks to people and staff linked to COVID-19 had been assessed, with measures in place to reduce infection risks.
“Risks to people and staff in relation to COVID-19 had been assessed and action taken to manage the risks.” from the report
Cleaning and furniture
needs fixingSome parts of the home had not been thoroughly cleaned, and some furniture could no longer be cleaned effectively. The provider addressed these shortfalls during the inspection.
“We found some areas of the service were not thoroughly cleaned and some items of furniture could no longer be effectively cleaned.” from the report
- 01What cleaning changes were made during the inspection, and how are they checked now?
- 02Which items of furniture could no longer be cleaned effectively, and have they been replaced or treated?
- 03How does the home keep family visits going if there is a COVID-19 outbreak?
- 04How often do people and staff receive COVID-19 testing when needed?
- 05How does the home manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 May 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, May 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found improved, kind and personalised care, with further work needed on some medicines guidance and specialist staff training.
This was an unannounced re-inspection on 30 April 2019. Two inspectors reviewed information about the home, spoke with people, relatives, managers and care staff, observed care, and examined care records, medicines records, training records and other documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated kindly, supported to make choices, and given care that reflected their needs and preferences.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, which was rated Requires Improvement. The five previous legal breaches had been met. However, inspectors recommended clearer protocols for medicines given when needed and more specialist training for staff.
Improvement since the last inspection
Inspectors found that the provider had acted on the previous inspection and that the quality of care had improved.
“The quality of care provided to people had improved since the last inspection.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw that people were treated with dignity and supported to remain as independent as possible.
“People were treated with compassion, dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's preferences and interests, and care plans reflected what people could do for themselves.
“Staff were knowledgeable about people and had a good understanding of their preferences and interests; this enabled them to provide personalised care.” from the report
Safer management and oversight
Risk assessments, incident monitoring and quality checks had improved. The manager had taken action after the previous inspection.
“New systems were in place to monitor the service and ensure quality was maintained.” from the report
Medicines given when needed
needs fixingProtocols for medicines given 'as and when required' did not contain enough detail to show that their use and effectiveness would be monitored properly. Inspectors made a recommendation for improvement.
“Information regarding 'as and when required' medicines still needed further details to ensure it was being administered and monitored effectively.” from the report
Specialist staff training
needs fixingStaff had received additional training, but this covered some rather than all of the specialist needs of people living at the home. Inspectors recommended further work based on current best practice.
“This included training to meet some, but not all people's specific needs.” from the report
- 01What specific changes have you made to the protocols for medicines given 'as and when required'?
- 02How do you record whether an 'as and when required' medicine was effective?
- 03What specialist training have staff completed for the needs of people living at the home?
- 04How will you make sure staff have the training needed for my relative's particular health or dementia needs?
- 05What activities are currently available, both at the home and in the local community?
This was an unannounced re-inspection that reviewed the overall quality of the care home, including its premises and care, and gave ratings for all five questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 May 2019 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 Rosegarth Residential
6 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2019
Location report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2019Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2018Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.