CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rowandale
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, recruitment, medicines, infection control and incident records were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were thoroughly assessed and care plans were clear. Staff were trained, health needs were supported, and specialist help was available for eating and drinking.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful. People were supported to communicate, make decisions, maintain their dignity and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Support was exceptionally person-centred. People had detailed communication guidance, regular meaningful activities and support to follow their interests and maintain relationships.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team was committed to high-quality, person-centred care. Audits, staff meetings and feedback were used to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rowandale was rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally personalised support and meaningful activities, with Responsive rated Outstanding.
This was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection on 30 May and 4 June 2019. One inspector spoke with managers, staff and relatives, observed care and activities, and checked care plans, medicines, training, recruitment, complaints and quality records.
The home supported 11 adults with learning disabilities and/or physical disabilities. Inspectors found people were safe, well cared for and supported by trained staff. Care plans reflected people's needs, health appointments were supported, and medicines and safeguarding systems were managed safely.
Responsive care was the strongest area. Staff used individual communication methods, supported people to make choices, and arranged a wide range of meaningful activities. The home was also rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led.
Personalised support
Care was tailored closely to people's preferences, needs and interests. Staff adapted support when people's circumstances changed.
“People continued to receive exceptionally person-centred support which reflected their needs, preferences and interests.” from the report
Communication and choice
The home used individual communication aids and guidance so people could express their views and take part in decisions about their care.
“People's choice and control was maximised by staff who had highly developed skills to engage with people.” from the report
Activities
People took part in a broad range of activities both inside and outside the home. Activity plans were reviewed regularly.
“People continued to engage in an exceptional range of meaningful activities which enhanced the quality of their lives.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect. People's independence and personal identity were supported.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff who were committed to respecting people's individual experiences and identity.” from the report
Safe systems
Safeguarding, risk management, medicines, recruitment and infection control systems were found to be effective.
“People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm by robust systems the service had in place.” from the report
Larger than current guidance
minorThe home accommodated 11 people and was larger than current best practice guidance. Inspectors noted that a sensory room was on a route through other rooms, although a separate lounge had been created for someone affected by busy areas.
“The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties.” from the report
- 01How would you provide a quiet space if my relative found the communal areas too busy or stressful?
- 02Which communication methods and aids would you use for my relative, and how would you keep their communication plan up to date?
- 03What activities would be available that match my relative's interests, and how could they decline or change an activity?
- 04How would you support my relative with health appointments, eating and drinking, or a modified diet if needed?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in reviewing their care plan and activity plan?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the previous ratings remained unchanged. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 August 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.
What inspectors found, December 2016
Rated Good overall; inspectors found caring, safe support and Outstanding responsiveness, especially through personalised activities.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 August 2016. The inspector observed care, spoke with relatives, professionals, staff and the manager, and checked care records, staff files, medicines records, rotas and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably qualified staff, safe medicines practice, appropriate training, person-centred care, respectful relationships and regular checks on quality and safety.
Responsive was rated Outstanding. The home offered a wide range of activities shaped around people's interests, abilities and choices. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed, and complaints were investigated and acted on.
The report says the home met the requirements of the legislation in force at the time. At the previous inspection on 23 March 2014, it was also meeting the applicable regulations.
Personalised activities
Inspectors found an exceptional programme shaped around people's likes, choices and abilities. A dedicated activities team reviewed activities to check people were enjoying them.
“The activities programme offered to people was exceptional.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff used suitable communication methods and respected people's privacy, dignity and choices. Observations showed positive relationships between people and staff.
“Staff delivered care to people ensuring their privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.” from the report
Good care planning
Care files contained detailed, up-to-date information about people's needs, preferences and specialist support. Families were involved in developing and reviewing care plans.
“Care files had been tailored around people's individual needs.” from the report
Strong quality monitoring
The home carried out regular audits covering areas such as medicines, incidents, accidents, health and safety, and moving and handling.
“Audits and quality monitoring was completed regularly and detailed the actions taken as a result if any gaps were identified.” from the report
Medicines fridge needed replacing
minorThe fridge used for medicines needing cold storage was not suitable and needed replacement. The manager said a replacement had been ordered and the report says it was delivered that day.
“We noted the fridge for medicines that required cold storage needed to be replaced.” from the report
- 01How do you currently review activities to make sure they still match each person's likes, choices and abilities?
- 02How are families involved in developing and reviewing their relative's care plan?
- 03How do you decide the staffing levels needed for each person's individual needs?
- 04What arrangements are currently in place for storing medicines that need cold storage?
- 05How do you support people with limited verbal communication to express choices or raise concerns?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating, including observations, discussions and checks of care, staffing, medicines and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 2016 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 Rowandale
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 July 2011.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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 £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.