CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rowles House Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines systems, infection control practices and appropriate follow-up of accidents and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this report. Inspectors did find that mental capacity assessments were decision-specific and that staff worked with health and social care professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this report. Inspectors recorded positive feedback about staff support and the culture of care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this report. The report says people and relatives could raise concerns and that these were taken seriously.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear management arrangements, regular quality checks and an open approach to feedback and incidents. Staff were supported through supervision and appraisals.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care, with some care plans and new policies still being developed.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 10 October 2023. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. There were enough suitable staff, medicines were managed safely, infection control was in place, and accidents and incidents were reviewed.
The home was also rated Good for being well-led. Inspectors found clear management, regular checks on quality, good teamwork and open communication. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback, and the home worked with health and social care professionals.
The overall rating was unchanged from the previous rated inspection in 2018. A 2020 targeted inspection looked at infection prevention and control but did not provide a rating.
Enough suitable staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's needs and that recruitment checks were completed.
“Yes, there are plenty staff. I really can't fault them, they're very good.” from the report
Safe medicines
The electronic medicines system, checks and audits helped reduce the risk of errors. There was also guidance for medicines given only when needed.
“An electronic medication system was used which reduced the risk of errors due to the cross checks and safeguards in place.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Falls, accidents and incidents were recorded, reviewed and analysed for patterns. The home used this information to reduce the risk of problems happening again.
“Regular analysis of accidents, incidents and falls were undertaken.” from the report
Clear management oversight
Inspectors found regular checks of key areas, including medicines, care records and health and safety. Feedback from people, relatives and staff was encouraged.
“The provider had a clear management structure that monitored the quality of care to drive improvements in service delivery.” from the report
More detail needed in some care plans
minorThe manager planned to add more guidance for staff when people showed behaviour that may indicate distress. This was intended to make sure staff had enough information to respond consistently.
“The registered manager planned to add some more detail to care plans in this area to ensure staff always had sufficient information and guidance to follow.” from the report
New policies were still being introduced
minorThe home was moving to electronic policies and procedures when inspectors visited. A plan was in place for staff to access and use them, but the change was not yet complete.
“At the time of inspection the provider was in the process of moving to a new set of policies and procedures.” from the report
- 01What extra detail has now been added to care plans for people whose behaviour may indicate distress?
- 02How are staff being trained and supported to use the new electronic policies and procedures?
- 03What ratings or recent assessments are available for the Effective, Caring and Responsive areas?
- 04How do you check that medicines given only when needed are being used appropriately?
- 05How are relatives' concerns recorded and followed up?
This inspection reported ratings for Safe and Well-led only; ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were not given in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 November 2023 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 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 8 December 2020. It followed concerns about infection prevention and control. The inspectors looked at whether the home was meeting legal requirements in this area.
The inspectors found good infection control arrangements. These included separate entrances, temperature checks, areas for putting on and removing PPE, cleaned visiting spaces, and measures to support social distancing.
Inspectors said they were assured that visitors, residents and staff were protected through infection control measures, including PPE, testing, safe admissions and outbreak planning. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a Good, Requires Improvement or Inadequate rating.
Visitor infection controls
Visitors had separate access arrangements and a dedicated space to spend time with relatives. The space was cleaned after each use.
“Relatives had a space which was cleaned after each use to spend time with their relatives.” from the report
PPE and entry checks
The home had arrangements for checking temperatures and for staff to put on and remove PPE safely.
“A senior member of staff checked staff's and visiting professional's temperatures on entry to the home.” from the report
Infection prevention arrangements
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing several infection risks, including testing, safe admissions and possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Clean environment
The inspectors found the home clean and noted pleasant odours. Social distancing measures were also in place.
“The home was clean and there were pleasant odours about the home.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not explain what specific improvement was needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection control changes have been made since the inspection?
- 02How are visitors currently checked and supported to prevent infections spreading?
- 03How do you make sure PPE is used safely by all staff?
- 04How often are visiting areas cleaned, and what happens if there is an infection outbreak?
- 05What resources did inspectors recommend you use to develop your infection control approach?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 December 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.
Every inspection of Rowles House Limited
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Luton
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. 81 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
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.