CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Roxton Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was following safe infection prevention and control procedures. They were also assured about its use of protective equipment, testing, admissions, hygiene and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not report findings or give a rating for effectiveness.
- Caring?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not report findings or give a rating for caring.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not report findings or give a rating for responsiveness.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not report findings or give a rating for leadership.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were safe during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Inspectors carried out an announced, targeted inspection on 9 December 2020. They looked at infection prevention and control because the home had a coronavirus outbreak.
The home had separated floors for people who tested positive and allocated staff to specific floors. Inspectors were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, followed social distancing and shielding rules, supported testing, and kept its infection control policy up to date.
The home supported people to keep in touch with their families by telephone, video calls and a secure social media portal. It also built a visiting pod and provided socially distanced activities, including individual activities for people who could not move around easily.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall rating or ratings for the other four questions.
Separate infection control zones
People who tested positive for COVID-19 were cared for on designated floors, with staff allocated to specific floors to reduce the risk of spreading infection.
“Staff were allocated to work on specific floors to minimise the spread of infection.” from the report
Family contact
The home helped people keep in touch with relatives through telephone and video calls, an online portal and a visiting pod.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their families through telephone and video calls.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
A pod was built so families could visit when it was safe to do so.
“A pod had been constructed to support family to visit people in the home when safe to do so.” from the report
Activities and wellbeing
The home provided small-group activities with social distancing and individual activities for people unable to move around.
“People's social and emotional wellbeing was promoted by an activities co-ordinator who led activities in small groups while socially distanced.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people who test positive for COVID-19 separated from other residents now?
- 02How are staff allocated to different areas of the home to reduce the spread of infection?
- 03How are personal protective equipment and regular testing managed for staff and residents?
- 04How can relatives visit, and is the visiting pod still available?
- 05What activities are offered to people who cannot leave their rooms or move around easily?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices during a coronavirus outbreak, not a full inspection of all five questions. 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.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some equipment and staff supervision needing attention.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 March 2019. Two inspectors, a nurse adviser and an expert by experience visited the home. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff, managers and healthcare professionals. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines support, detailed risk assessments, prompt healthcare referrals and staff who treated people with kindness and respect.
The report also noted some areas to improve. Some equipment needed replacing because it could no longer be cleaned effectively. Staff supervision was not as regular as some staff wanted. The home also did not have a named activities worker for part of the inspection, although staff continued to offer activities and a new employee had been recruited.
The overall Good rating means inspectors found the service met legal requirements and that people's outcomes were consistently good. The previous inspection, published in March 2017, was also rated Good.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to support people promptly. Medicines were given by trained staff and checked regularly.
“People were supported by enough staff who were available to safely support them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors observed positive relationships and support that protected dignity and independence.
“People told us, and we saw, they were treated with care by a compassionate and respectful staff team.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans covered people's health, personal care, dietary and social needs. Staff understood people's individual wishes and preferences.
“People's care plans considered all aspects of their individual circumstances; for example, dietary, social, personal care and health needs.” from the report
Good healthcare support
People were referred promptly to healthcare professionals when needed. Staff could explain people's health needs and how to support them.
“The provider referred people for healthcare assessments promptly if required.” from the report
Responsive management
The home had systems for handling complaints and acted on feedback from people and relatives. Inspectors also found good links with healthcare professionals and the local community.
“We saw complaints were investigated in line with the provider's policy.” from the report
Equipment replacement
needs fixingSome equipment was worn and could no longer be cleaned effectively. The provider had identified this and was replacing it.
“However, some pieces of equipment at Roxton Nursing Home needed replacing as it was no longer possible to effectively clean them.” from the report
Staff supervision
minorSupervision sessions were not as regular as some staff wanted. Inspectors said this process had not yet been fully embedded.
“However, we saw these supervision sessions were not as regular as some staff would like.” from the report
Activities leadership
minorThere was no named staff member for activities during part of the inspection. Other staff continued to engage people in activities, and a new employee had been recruited.
“At this inspection Roxton Nursing Home did not have a specific named staff member to support people with activities.” from the report
- 01Have all the pieces of equipment that could not be cleaned effectively now been replaced?
- 02How often do staff receive supervision now, and how is this monitored?
- 03Who is currently responsible for planning and leading activities?
- 04What further accessibility work, including the planned wet room and orientation signs, has been completed?
- 05How are concerns raised with the home investigated and followed up?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and it was partly prompted by concerns that had been raised. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 April 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 Roxton Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 February 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 Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.