CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rowan Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks, safeguarding concerns, staffing, medicines, cleanliness and accidents were managed effectively.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and choices. Staff had relevant training and worked with health professionals, although some people raised concerns that mental capacity principles were not always applied consistently.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their care and supported to make choices.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Support was extremely personalised and flexible. Staff helped people maintain relationships, take part in work and education, develop skills and pursue important ambitions.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager had effective systems for monitoring quality and supported an open, person-centred culture. However, the service was managing several important staff changes and some relatives and professionals questioned whether improvements would last.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good, with Outstanding personalised support, but inspectors noted management change and concerns about sustaining quality.
This was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection. One inspector visited on 26 and 28 February 2020. Inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and health and social care professionals. They also reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. It was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Responsive care was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly and supported by staff who knew them well.
The strongest findings were about highly individualised support. Staff helped people build skills, relationships, confidence and independence, and supported them to achieve personal ambitions. The home was also going through management changes, and some people raised concerns about whether high standards would be sustained.
Highly personalised support
Staff took time to understand people's histories, preferences and goals. Care plans and daily support were adapted to each person.
“Support and care provided by staff was extremely personalised.” from the report
Helping people achieve goals
People were supported with work, education, relationships, travel, hobbies and independent living. Inspectors found this improved confidence, wellbeing and skills.
“Staff tenaciously supported people to achieve their ambitions and aspirations.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff understood how each person communicated and adjusted their approach. People were supported with dignity, privacy and compassion.
“Staff treated people with kindness and respect, whilst promoting their happiness and well-being.” from the report
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, effective risk management and safe medicines procedures. The home was clean and well maintained.
“People received their medicines from staff who had completed the provider's mandatory training.” from the report
No registered manager at the visit
needs fixingThe previous registered manager had left and the new manager was still completing the CQC registration process. Ask who is legally responsible for the home now.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
Sustaining quality during change
needs fixingSome relatives and professionals described earlier cycles where care improved after extra management attention and later declined. They hoped the current improvement would continue.
“However, some relatives and professionals had raised concerns regarding the ability of the management team to sustain high quality care, in response to people's changing complex needs over time.” from the report
Mental capacity practice
needs fixingSome professionals and a family member were concerned that staff had not always applied mental capacity principles consistently, despite staff showing a sound understanding during the inspection.
“However, two community professionals and one family member were concerned that staff had not always applied the principles consistently.” from the report
Communication about complaints
minorMost people and relatives said communication was good, but one relative wanted clearer information about action taken after raising a concern.
“One relative felt the manager could improve communication with in relation to action taken, when they had raised concerns.” from the report
- 01Has the manager now become registered with CQC, and who is responsible for the home until that process is complete?
- 02What systems are now in place to make sure improvements in care are sustained over time?
- 03How does the home check that mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions are applied consistently?
- 04How will families be told what action has been taken after they raise a concern or complaint?
- 05How will the home maintain the stable, skilled staff team during management changes?
This was an unannounced planned comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the previous ratings compared in the report. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 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, July 2017
Rowan Cottage was rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found safe, caring and highly personalised support, with Outstanding ratings for responsiveness and leadership.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 10 May 2017. One inspector reviewed records and policies, observed support, spoke with six people living at the home, staff and professionals, and considered feedback from relatives and earlier inspections.
People were found to be safe. Staff understood safeguarding, risks were assessed and reviewed, staffing levels were sufficient, recruitment checks were thorough, and medicines were managed safely. Staff were trained and supported, people's health and nutritional needs were met, and consent and mental capacity requirements were followed.
Inspectors found warm and trusting relationships. Staff knew people well and helped them build independence, manage challenges, maintain relationships and make choices. Support plans were detailed and activities were based on each person's goals, interests and routines.
The overall rating was Outstanding. Safe, effective and caring were rated Good, while responsive and well-led were rated Outstanding. A previous concern about regular staff supervision had been addressed, with meetings now taking place regularly.
Safety and staffing
The home had enough experienced staff and used thorough recruitment checks. Medicines, emergency arrangements, infection control and routine safety checks were managed safely.
“There were sufficient experienced and trained staff to meet individual people's needs.” from the report
Skilled support
Staff received training linked to their roles and to people's particular needs. The report also found that staff were now receiving regular supervision after this had been a problem at the previous inspection.
“Staff were provided with training to develop their skills and knowledge to enable them to perform their duties effectively.” from the report
Independence
Staff helped people overcome difficulties and make progress towards more independent lives. They supported people to make decisions while respecting their privacy and dignity.
“Positive and trusting relationships had been established which had led to excellent work in developing and maintaining people's independence.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans reflected people's preferences, routines, goals and aspirations. Staff offered varied activities and helped people take part in education, employment, travel and community life.
“People's support plans were comprehensive and provided detailed guidance to staff on preferences and personal routines.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are each person's goals, preferences and routines reviewed and updated?
- 02How do you support positive risk taking while keeping people safe?
- 03How do you make sure staff receive regular supervision, training and competency checks?
- 04How are people involved in decisions about their care, activities, holidays and community life?
- 05How do you involve families and other professionals when people's needs or relationships change?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and included observations, discussions with people, staff and professionals, and checks of care records, staff files, audits and safety records. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 July 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 Rowan Cottage
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- July 2017Outstandingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- March 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
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 8 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
42 live-in carers within about an hour of West Berkshire
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 £1,260 a week. 36 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“Titus has compassion, patience, a great sense of humour and a very professional attitude.”
“Barbara treated my mother-in-law with enormous love and compassion and provided an environment where she could feel safe and seen”
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.