CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rosewood
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, carried out testing, maintained hygiene and social distancing, and had plans to prevent or manage outbreaks.
- 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, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was a targeted inspection on 23 March 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control measures, including visitors, PPE, testing, cleaning and outbreak planning.
Inspectors found good practice. Visitors were tested and checked before entering, staff used PPE correctly, and there were cleaning, distancing and zoning arrangements.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide a new overall quality rating or ratings for all five areas of care.
Visitor safety checks
Visitors were tested and checked before entering, with PPE required.
“Prior to entering the service all visitors not subject to any other regular testing programme did a COVID-19 rapid test, a temperature check, health questionnaire and wearing personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Cleaning and hygiene
The home had a cleaning programme, including deep cleaning and frequent disinfection of frequently touched items.
“There was a cleaning programme in place with deep cleans and frequent disinfecting and sanitising of frequently touched items.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The provider had plans for possible outbreaks and arrangements for people leaving or returning to the home.
“The provider had contingency plans in place to manage any potential future virus or infection outbreak and arrangements for people leaving or returning to the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are still in place now?
- 02How are visitors currently tested, checked and supported to use PPE?
- 03How often are frequently touched items cleaned and disinfected?
- 04What happens if there is an infection outbreak, and how would relatives be informed?
- 05What was the home's most recent full inspection rating covering areas not assessed in this visit?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; it did not rate the other areas of care or give an overall quality rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 April 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, July 2018
Rosewood was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with improvements made to mental capacity and DoLS arrangements.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 12 June 2018. One inspector reviewed records, observed care, spoke with three people, staff and the manager, and checked training, complaints and quality checks. Six people were living in the home.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable support plans, kind care, activities and access to health professionals.
At the previous inspection in January 2016, the home had also been rated Good, but action was needed on the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Inspectors found this action had been completed, with assessments and applications made where appropriate.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were administered, recorded and checked appropriately, including support for one person to manage some medicines independently.
“We checked and found that people were kept as safe as possible because staff managed, administered and recorded medication appropriately.” from the report
Choice and legal safeguards
The home had improved its work on mental capacity and DoLS since the previous inspection. People were offered choices and support was provided in the least restrictive way possible.
“At this comprehensive inspection we found that the provider had made improvements.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people's individual communication needs, likes and dislikes. Inspectors observed laughter, positive interactions and support that protected privacy, dignity and independence.
“This showed us that people were looked after and cared for in a kind and considerate manner.” from the report
Individual activities and community life
People were supported to follow their interests, attend day centres, visit places in the community and take holidays or day trips. This helped reduce social isolation.
“People continue to be supported by staff to access the community and follow their interests.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits and meetings to identify improvements. Inspectors found that actions from a medication audit had been followed through.
“This meant that the audits were robust and issues that had been actioned to improve the service had been followed through by staff.” from the report
End of life plans still being updated
needs fixingSome end of life information was recorded, but the manager said plans were being updated to give staff more complete guidance.
“The manager said that end of life support plans were currently being updated to provide more comprehensive information for staff.” from the report
Feedback was not clearly separated
minorQuality survey information combined feedback from several services. This made it difficult to know which comments related specifically to this home.
“However, the provider had incorporated information from several services and it was therefore difficult to know which comments related to which service.” from the report
- 01Have the end of life support plans now been fully updated, and how would they guide staff if someone became seriously ill?
- 02How do you collect and review feedback that relates specifically to this home rather than other services?
- 03How are mental capacity assessments and DoLS applications kept under review when people's needs or choices change?
- 04How many staff are normally on duty, and how is one-to-one support maintained during sickness or holidays?
- 05How do people choose their activities, outings and daily routines, and how are these choices recorded?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; six people lived in the home and one inspector carried out the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 July 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 Rosewood
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 December 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 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.