CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Roxholm Hall Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, carried out testing, managed admissions and outbreaks, and kept the environment clean.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Roxholm Hall Care Centre was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control during a COVID-19 outbreak was safe.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 14 December 2020. It checked infection prevention and control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors found that a recent COVID-19 outbreak had been managed well. People who tested positive were isolated in line with government guidance, and staff followed testing and self-isolation rules.
The home had suitable supplies of protective equipment, regular testing, enhanced cleaning and arrangements for safer visiting. Inspectors were assured about all the infection control areas they checked.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Outbreak management
The home used its outbreak plans safely. People with COVID-19 were isolated and people living with dementia were supported with social distancing.
“A recent outbreak of COVID- 19 at the service had been managed well and the plans in place to support people had been utilised safely.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
The home had enough protective equipment, hand sanitiser and cleaning supplies. People and staff were tested regularly.
“The service had sufficient stocks of PPE and were supported by the provider to maintain these stocks.” from the report
Clean environment
Housekeeping staff followed enhanced cleaning schedules and inspectors found the environment clean and hygienic.
“Housekeeping staff maintained enhanced cleaning schedules and the environment was kept clean and hygienic.” from the report
Keeping families connected
People could use telephone and video calls, and a specially adapted room allowed safer face-to-face visits.
“People were supported to keep in touch with their relatives and friends through telephone calls and video calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, and how are they checked?
- 02How are visitors currently managed, including protective equipment, screening and end-of-life visits?
- 03How often are people living in the home and staff tested, and how are positive results managed?
- 04What were the home's full ratings for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care at its most recent comprehensive inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during a COVID-19 outbreak; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 January 2021 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 2019
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements since 2017.
Inspectors visited without notice on 12 and 14 March 2019. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care plans, medicine records, staff files, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for being safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing for the 30 people living there, safe medicine arrangements, clean surroundings and detailed risk assessments.
Care was planned around people's needs, choices and interests. Staff were described as kind and respectful. The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in December 2017 and was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.
Safe medicines
Medicine records checked for six people had no gaps. Staff administering medicines had been assessed as competent.
“We looked at the medicine administration records (MAR) for six people and found that medicines had been given consistently and there were no gaps in the MAR.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people calmly and gave them time to communicate. People were treated with dignity and their personal choices were respected.
“People were cared for by kind, caring and compassionate staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and interests. Staff supported people to remain independent and continue activities that mattered to them.
“Care was person centred and people and their relatives were involved in planning their care.” from the report
Improved leadership
Quality monitoring and electronic care records had improved. The provider was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.
“At this inspection we found that the provider had made significant improvements and was no longer in breach of regulation 17.” from the report
Recruitment and capacity
needs fixingThe manager had found it difficult to recruit enough skilled staff. The provider therefore kept the home to no more than 30 people, although it could accommodate up to 39.
“The registered manager had found it challenging to recruit sufficient numbers of skilled staff to the service.” from the report
No dedicated transport
minorThe home did not have its own transport for trips or GP appointments. It was fundraising for a wheelchair-accessible vehicle, while private hire cars were being used.
“The service did not have its own transport to take people on trips out or to attend appointments with their local GP.” from the report
- 01How many staff are currently working on each shift, and is the home still limiting occupancy because of recruitment?
- 02What progress has been made in recruiting enough skilled staff for the home to operate above 30 residents?
- 03How are GP appointments, hospital visits and trips arranged while the home does not have its own transport?
- 04How are medicine checks and staff competency assessments kept up to date?
- 05How will the new quality assurance system continue the improvements found at this inspection?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 June 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.
Every inspection of Roxholm Hall Care Centre
6 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.