CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rotherlea
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection control was safe during a COVID-19 outbreak.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 10 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control during a COVID-19 outbreak, and asked about staffing pressures.
The home was clean and hygienic. People and staff were grouped in specific areas to reduce infection spread. Inspectors found safe arrangements for visitors, isolation, personal protective equipment, testing, laundry and cleaning.
Staff supported people who had to isolate with one-to-one time and activities. Staffing pressures were managed, including careful use of agency staff. The home had updated policies and checks to identify and fix infection control issues.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives findings about infection control, but it does not provide a full quality rating for the service.
Clean environment
The home was clean and hygienic, with strong cleaning and laundry arrangements to reduce the spread of infection.
“The home was clean and hygienic with robust processes in place for cleaning high touch areas, communal space's and people's rooms.” from the report
Support during isolation
Staff used one-to-one time and activities to support people's wellbeing when they had to isolate.
“When people were isolated in their rooms, one-to-one time was utilised to talk or offer therapeutic activities.” from the report
Managing staffing pressures
The home managed staffing pressures during the outbreak. It limited the use of agency staff working across several homes where possible.
“Staffing pressures as a result of the outbreak were managed effectively.” from the report
Safe visiting arrangements
The home allowed people to keep in contact with relatives while using visitor testing, protective equipment and safety guidance.
“The provider had ensured that visiting was facilitated within the home and people were able to maintain contact with their relatives during the outbreak.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control arrangements are in place now, and when were they last reviewed?
- 02How would visits be managed if there were another outbreak?
- 03How does the home support people who need to isolate, particularly people living with dementia?
- 04How are staffing pressures managed, and how often is agency staff used?
- 05What actions were taken after the root cause analysis of the outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full service inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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, January 2020
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and safer care, but staffing levels and leadership still created important risks.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 14 November 2019. They observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care plans, medicine records, staff files and management records.
There had been clear improvements since the previous inspection. Medicines, nutrition, hydration, moving and positioning, infection control and safeguarding were better managed. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
However, staffing was not always enough for people's assessed needs. Some people waited for help, required checks were missed, and there was not enough time for conversation, activities and stimulation. Information was also not always adapted for people living with dementia.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Effective and Caring were rated Good. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. The provider remained in breach of Regulations 17 and 18.
Improved medicines safety
Medicines were better managed and there was stronger checking that people received them according to prescribing guidance.
“Medicines management had improved. People's medicines were well-managed and there was better oversight to ensure that people received their medicines according to prescribing guidance.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People said staff were caring, and inspectors saw staff explain what they were doing, offer reassurance and protect people's dignity.
“A caring culture was created by the management team and this was shared by staff who were gentle in their approach and kind and caring.” from the report
Better nutrition and hydration support
People at risk of malnutrition or dehydration had clearer guidance and closer monitoring. Food and drinks were adapted to support people's health.
“People assessed as being at increased risk of malnutrition and dehydration had received safe and effective care.” from the report
Learning from earlier problems
The home had worked with health and social care professionals and used learning from earlier inspections to improve care, including modified diets and mental capacity processes.
“The provider and registered manager had learned from issues found at the last inspection as well as at inspections of the provider's other services within the Sussex area.” from the report
Staffing did not match people's needs
seriousStaffing levels were reduced when occupancy fell, but some people's needs had increased. This meant people could wait for support and one person's required 15-minute checks were missed for almost four hours.
“The provider had not ensured that there was sufficient staff to meet people's assessed levels of need.” from the report
Insufficient activities and interaction
needs fixingSome people spent long periods unoccupied. Staff wanted to provide more stimulation but said staffing pressures limited the time available.
“Observations showed most people spent large amounts of time unoccupied.” from the report
Information was not always accessible
needs fixingComplaints procedures and surveys had not been adapted enough for some people living with dementia. The provider was asked to continue seeking advice about this.
“Information had not been adapted to meet the needs of some people living with dementia.” from the report
Weaknesses in governance
seriousThe provider had not always assessed, monitored or improved quality and safety effectively. The report says this breach had continued through six consecutive inspections.
“The provider had not always assessed, monitored or improved the quality and safety of the service provided.” from the report
- 01How many care staff are currently deployed on each unit during the day and at night?
- 02How do you calculate staffing from each person's assessed needs, rather than only from occupancy?
- 03How do you check that required observations, including 15-minute checks, are completed and recorded?
- 04What activities and one-to-one interaction are available for people who do not enjoy group activities?
- 05How are menus, complaints information and surveys adapted for people living with dementia?
This was planned as a focused follow-up to previous enforcement action, but became a comprehensive inspection after inspectors found significant improvements in some key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 January 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Rotherlea
6 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 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.