CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rowden House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, enough staff, safe medicines systems and appropriate safeguarding training. Staff also reviewed accidents and incidents to look for ways to prevent them happening again.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and staff showed good knowledge of people's needs. People received suitable food, healthcare support and training, and the home followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed treating people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their care and activities, and staff supported privacy and independence.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was tailored to people's wishes and interests. Inspectors saw creative activities, strong community links, support for relationships and imaginative ways to help people achieve personal goals.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open and approachable management style. Audits, meetings, surveys and discussions with people and staff were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally responsive, personalised care, with all other areas rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days in January 2020. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care records, recruitment files, medicines records and quality checks.
The home supported 33 older people at the time, with places for up to 39. Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly, supported by skilled staff and involved in decisions about their care.
The strongest area was responsiveness, rated Outstanding. People had personalised support, a wide range of activities and meaningful opportunities to keep interests, relationships and independence. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were all rated Good.
The overall Good rating means the inspectors found the home consistently met the standards they checked. The previous overall rating was also Good, while the Responsive rating improved from Good to Outstanding.
Personalised activities
People helped plan activities and took part in events linked to their interests, memories and aspirations. Inspectors saw activities helping people who usually stayed in their rooms to become involved.
“There was a wide a range of stimulating activities, ranging from parties, revisiting hobbies, visiting entertainers to virtual reality sessions.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff supported people to make choices and live in ways that mattered to them. This included adapting arrangements so one person could continue living with their cat.
“People received care which was personalised to meet their needs and wishes.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to respond to bells, support meals and activities, and spend time talking with people. A new flexible staffing approach was also being developed.
“We observed staff were not rushed and there were enough staff to support people at mealtimes and during activities.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were relaxed with staff, who took time to talk with them and protected their dignity and privacy during care.
“We observed people were treated with kindness and care by staff.” from the report
Open management
People and staff described the management as approachable. The home used audits, feedback and staff discussions to identify improvements.
“There were effective quality assurance systems to monitor care and plans for on-going improvements.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How has the planned flexible working system changed staffing levels and the amount of time staff can spend with each person?
- 02How will you support my relative's particular interests, hobbies and relationships?
- 03How will you involve my relative and our family in keeping the care plan up to date as needs change?
- 04How would you support my relative's end-of-life wishes, including comfort, pain relief and treatment decisions?
- 05What support is available for my relative's communication, cultural, religious or dietary needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the overall rating based on findings from the home, care and records. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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, June 2017
Rowden House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some minor issues around activities, food and medicines stock.
Inspectors visited without notice on 24 and 25 May 2017. They spoke with people living at the home, visitors, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staff files, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines practice, trained staff, good access to healthcare and care that respected people's choices, privacy and dignity.
The home had improved its staffing and safety arrangements since the previous inspection. The overall rating remained Good. Inspectors also noted that activities were still being developed, some people felt the food could improve, and medicines no longer needed were sometimes kept in stock.
Enough staff
Inspectors found that staffing improvements from the previous inspection had been maintained. Staff were available to meet people's care needs and spend time with them.
“There were adequate numbers of suitable staff to meet people's needs and to spend time socialising with them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were described as kind and patient. Inspectors saw people being supported at their own pace, with privacy and dignity respected.
“During the visit we saw kind and patient interactions between staff and the people they were supporting.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's histories, preferences and changing needs. People were involved in decisions about their care and daily choices.
“By involving people in their care plans it made sure staff respected what was important to them.” from the report
Good management oversight
The manager and provider used audits and feedback to monitor the service and make improvements. Staff and visitors spoke positively about the management.
“The provider and registered manager had quality assurance systems which enabled the quality of the care and the environment to be monitored and improved.” from the report
Medicines kept in stock
needs fixingSome medicines were still stored even though they were no longer being given. The manager said these would be reviewed and returned if not needed.
“There were occasions when medicines had been kept in stock despite no longer being administered.” from the report
Activities still developing
minorSome people felt there were not enough activities. Inspectors said the newer programme was still being embedded and made more personal.
“Some people felt there were not enough activities for them.” from the report
Food could improve
minorThe home offered choices and met special dietary needs, but some people said the food still needed improvement.
“Occasionally, people told us the food still needed improving.” from the report
Incomplete work histories
minorSome staff files did not contain a full employment history because the application form only asked for 10 years. The manager completed the missing information and changed the form during and after the inspection.
“We found some staff did not have a full employment history because the provider's application form only asked for 10 years.” from the report
- 01What has changed in the activities programme since the inspection, and how do you make activities fit each person's interests?
- 02How do you check that medicines which are no longer needed are removed from stock?
- 03What changes have been made to food and mealtime arrangements following comments that the food needed improving?
- 04How do you keep care plans up to date when a person's health or support needs change?
- 05How do you support people with dementia to make choices and take part in daily life?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 June 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 Rowden House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 November 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
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
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 £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.