CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rosehill Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about the home's infection prevention and control arrangements. These included visitor screening, personal protective equipment, testing, social distancing, cleaning and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Rosehill Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 February 2021. It checked infection prevention and control because the home had experienced a coronavirus outbreak.
Inspectors found visitor screening, suitable use of personal protective equipment, regular testing and social distancing measures. They also found the home was clean and that frequently touched surfaces were cleaned regularly.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection looked at infection control practices only and did not give an overall care rating.
Visitor screening
The home had systems to screen visitors before they entered, helping to reduce infection risks.
“Systems were in place to screen any visitors before they entered the home to reduce the potential spread of infection.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff had access to enough personal protective equipment and had received infection control training.
“Staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) and there was sufficient PPE around all areas of the home.” from the report
Testing and outbreak measures
Regular testing was in place, and the home had changed its layout and created zones to help manage infection spread.
“Regular testing for Covid-19 was in place for people and the staff team.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home looked clean and that frequently touched areas were cleaned regularly.
“The home looked clean and housekeeping staff made sure they frequently cleaned touch points, such as door handles and light switches.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors screened before entering the home now?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested for Covid-19 or other infections now?
- 03How does the home manage infection outbreaks and keep different areas of the home separated when needed?
- 04What infection prevention and control training have staff completed recently?
- 05How often are high-touch areas such as door handles and light switches cleaned?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 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.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some records and safety certificates needing improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 22 and 28 October 2019. Inspectors spoke with six people, three relatives and seven staff. They observed care and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, maintenance and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives described staff as kind and respectful. Inspectors found enough staff, a clean and well-maintained home, suitable food and good support for health needs.
There were some minor shortfalls. Some safety certificates were out of date, medicines records were not always complete, and some care plans lacked important detail. The manager took action on these issues during or immediately after the inspection. This was the first rating since the provider's new registration, so there is no earlier rating under that registration to compare.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind, respectful and attentive. Inspectors saw a calm, warm and friendly atmosphere.
“People and relatives were very positive about the care, kindness and respect shown by staff.” from the report
Enough staff
Staffing was organised across the four units. Inspectors found that staff responded quickly when people needed help.
“Staff were deployed in an effective way in each of the units so there as always quick response to calls for assistance.” from the report
Adapted home
The building had features to help people living with dementia and people with physical needs, including signs, handrails and adapted facilities.
“The accommodation was very well adapted to meet the needs of people living there.” from the report
Activities and community links
People were offered varied activities and trips out. Some activities were purposeful and linked with the local community.
“People described a huge range of meaningful and interesting activities they were offered and these were advertised in every unit.” from the report
Safety certificates
needs fixingSome safety certificates were not up to date during the inspection. The report says this was addressed immediately afterwards.
“Some safety certificates were not up to date at the time of the inspection but were addressed immediately afterwards.” from the report
Medicines recording
minorMedicines were administered safely, but inspectors found some minor recording problems. The manager took immediate action.
“There were some minor recording shortfalls. The registered manager took immediate action to address this and wrote to us to confirm what they had done.” from the report
Care plan detail
needs fixingSome care records did not explain important details clearly enough to ensure consistent support, including how people took medicines or were supported when distressed.
“Some specific details were not always set out in their care records to ensure consistency, for example how people took their medicines or how to support them when distressed.” from the report
Feedback was not shared
minorThe home analysed feedback from people and families but had not shared the results with them. The manager said this would be done.
“Their views were analysed but the results were not fed back to people.” from the report
- 01How were the medicines recording shortfalls corrected, and how are medicines records checked now?
- 02Are all safety certificates current, and how often are they reviewed?
- 03How are care plans checked to make sure they explain support needs clearly and consistently?
- 04How do people and families now receive the results of feedback about the home?
- 05What changes have been made since this 2019 inspection?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the accommodation and care provided; it was the first rating since the provider's new registration. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 December 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 Rosehill Residential Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 November 2018.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.