CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Rutland House Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People and relatives said they felt safe, and inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines management and appropriate fire and infection control arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before admission. Staff had relevant training and supervision, people could choose their meals, and healthcare professionals were involved when needed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed treating people kindly and respectfully. People were involved in decisions, and staff supported privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and person-centred. The home provided activities, supported communication needs, helped people maintain relationships and responded to complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable leadership, a positive culture and systems for checking quality. The manager acted promptly on minor improvements identified during the inspection.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rutland House Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and well-organised care, with only minor recording improvements identified.
This was the home’s first inspection since it registered. It was unannounced and took place on 22 June, 29 June and 04 July 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records and recruitment files.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and good infection control. People were supported to access healthcare and were involved in decisions about their care.
Inspectors found that care was person-centred and that staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. The home offered activities, including one-to-one support, and respected people's choices if they did not want to join in. The manager and staff were described as approachable, and there were systems to monitor quality and respond to complaints.
Enough staff
People, relatives and staff said there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Inspectors saw staff respond promptly and noted that staffing levels were adjusted when needs changed.
“We have enough staff so we don't have to rush. We are working in the residents' home. Most of all, we spend time with them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were observed speaking and behaving respectfully. People were supported to make choices, keep their privacy and remain as independent as possible.
“We observed staff interacting in a kind and respectful way with people involving them in their care.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included people's preferences and instructions about their personal care, health, communication, mobility and emotional support.
“People's care records were detailed, person-centred and gave staff the instructions needed to appropriately support the individual.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered group and one-to-one activities, including links with local organisations. People who preferred to stay in their rooms were offered alternatives.
“Where people wished to remain in their rooms, they were offered alternative activities on a one-to-one basis to reduce the risk of social isolation.” from the report
Open leadership
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management. Inspectors found the manager visible and approachable, with systems for feedback, audits and improvement.
“We observed the manager was visible and approachable throughout the inspection and knew people's needs and preferences exceptionally well.” from the report
Some records needed improving
minorAudits had identified improvements needed in recording activities and emotional support. The manager addressed these issues.
“Where these had identified issues, such as improvements which could be made to the detailed recording of activities and emotional support needs, this was addressed by the registered manager.” from the report
- 01How are you now recording activities and people's emotional support needs?
- 02How do you record and check temperatures for medicines storage?
- 03What improvements to the communal areas are still planned, and when will they be completed?
- 04How would you support someone who prefers to stay in their room and does not want to join group activities?
- 05How would my relative and family be involved in care planning and decisions?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control arrangements. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 August 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.
Every inspection of Rutland House Nursing Home
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 April 2022.
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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.