CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Roselands Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place, including testing, protective equipment, social distancing and hygiene.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors visited the home on 5 November 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic.
They looked only at infection prevention and control. They were assured about visiting arrangements, testing, personal protective equipment, social distancing, hygiene and the home's infection control policy.
The home was inspected but not rated overall, and Safe was also marked inspected but not rated. This report does not give ratings for the other four areas of care.
Managed family visits
Family visits had to be booked and were limited to 30 minutes so that social distancing could take place safely.
“The provider had arrangements in place for families and relatives to visit their family members.” from the report
End of life visiting
The home had special arrangements for relatives visiting people receiving end of life care, including protective equipment requirements.
“Special arrangements were in place for people receiving End of Life Care.” from the report
Testing arrangements
The home tested people and staff for COVID-19 and followed government testing guidance.
“The provider had appropriate arrangements to test people and staff for Covid 19 and was following government guidance on testing.” from the report
Staff support
Staff received training and guidance on infection control, protective equipment and supporting people with dementia during the pandemic.
“Staff also received appropriate guidance on how to support people with dementia to understand the pandemic and Covid 19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have the visiting arrangements changed since this inspection, including booking times and visiting people receiving end of life care?
- 02How are people and staff tested for COVID-19 now, and what happens if a test is positive?
- 03What protective equipment and infection control training do staff receive now?
- 04How do staff help people living with dementia understand infection control measures?
- 05What were the home's most recent ratings for care areas that this targeted inspection did not assess?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the report did not rate the other four questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 November 2020 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 2017
Roselands Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with mixed views about activities.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 1 November 2017. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, risk plans, staff files, rotas and quality checks.
The home was supporting 17 people, with one person in hospital. Inspectors found that people were safe, received suitable care and medicines, and lived in a clean environment. Staff were trained, there were enough staff, and people's health, food and drink needs were supported.
People and relatives described staff as kind and respectful. Care was planned around people's needs, choices and relationships. People knew how to complain, and inspectors found that complaints were investigated and resolved.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had also been rated Good at its previous inspection, so this inspection found that the rating remained Good.
Safe care
Staff understood safeguarding and risks to people's wellbeing. Inspectors found enough staff and safe arrangements for medicines and infection control.
“Staff had sufficient guidance and followed good practice to provide safe care to people in line with the identified risks.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives were happy with the compassionate care. Staff involved people in decisions and respected their privacy, dignity and choices.
“People using the service and their relatives were happy with the compassionate and caring manner in which staff provided care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's backgrounds, health needs, likes, dislikes and preferences. Staff knew people well and adapted support to their individual needs.
“Care plans were person centred and reflected people's background, medical and social needs, likes and dislikes and preferences about how they wanted their support to be delivered.” from the report
Good management checks
The home had regular audits and an improvement plan for shortfalls. Staff described teamwork and morale as good.
“The quality assurance systems were used effectively to identify and resolve any shortfalls in care delivery.” from the report
Mixed views about activities
minorSome people said they became bored or spent much of their time watching television. Others enjoyed walks, outings, quizzes and the garden, and the manager said activity schedules would continue to be developed.
“People using the service and their relatives had mixed views about the activities provided at the service.” from the report
Uneven garden ramp
minorPart of the ramp to the garden was slightly uneven. Refurbishment was under way, and staff said they knew how to support people safely.
“However, a part of the ramp was slightly uneven.” from the report
- 01What activities are currently available for people who may become bored, and how are their interests used to plan them?
- 02Has the uneven section of the ramp to the garden been repaired?
- 03How many staff are on duty at different times, and how are absences covered?
- 04How are people's care plans and risks reviewed when their needs change?
- 05How are medicines records and stock checks kept accurate?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the home and care provided, with ratings given for all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 December 2017 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 Roselands Residential Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Roselands Residential Care Home →
- December 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Roselands Residential Care Home →
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 March 2015.
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 Croydon
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 £1,230 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.