CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Rutland Manor Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing met people's needs, medicines were administered by trained nurses, and infection control measures were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in and care records were reviewed as needs changed. Staff training was up to date, and people were supported with food, drink and healthcare.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff were kind, patient and respectful. People and relatives were involved in care planning, and staff supported people's choices, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, choices and preferences and were reviewed regularly. The home provided activities, supported communication needs and investigated complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found strong oversight through audits, action plans and staff supervision. People, relatives and staff had several ways to give feedback, and managers were described as approachable.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Rutland Manor Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with previous medicines recording issues followed up.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 16 May 2023. Inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They also observed care and reviewed records and information from other organisations.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines management, relevant staff training and good infection control. People were supported with food, healthcare, activities and choices about their daily lives.
The inspection was partly prompted by concerns about people's care and treatment. Inspectors found no evidence during this visit that people were at risk of harm from that concern. The overall rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in 2018.
Staffing and safety
People and relatives said staffing levels met people's needs. Inspectors saw people receiving care promptly, and found safe recruitment and risk management.
“People and their relatives consistently told us the staffing levels met their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind and respectful. Inspectors observed care that protected people's dignity.
“We observed staff supporting people with dignity and respect throughout our inspection.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's choices and preferences and were reviewed when needs changed. Staff encouraged people to make decisions and remain as independent as possible.
“People and their relatives had contributed to their care planning.” from the report
Activities and social contact
The home employed activities staff and offered activities intended to keep people stimulated and reduce isolation. Relatives spoke positively about the range of activities.
“The service employed activities staff, who provided meaningful activities to keep people stimulated, as well as reduce social isolation.” from the report
Previous medicines recording issues
minorThe provider had identified some medicines recording issues through its audits. The report says these were promptly followed up and appropriate action was taken, but families may want to ask how this is monitored now.
“Where medication recording issues had been identified this had been promptly followed up, with appropriate actions taken.” from the report
- 01What medicines recording issues were identified, and how do you check that records remain accurate?
- 02How do you make sure staffing levels continue to meet my relative's needs, including at weekends?
- 03How would you review and change my relative's care plan if their needs or preferences changed?
- 04Which activities would suit my relative's interests, communication needs and abilities?
- 05How would you involve me and my relative in decisions about care and raise concerns if needed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; it was prompted partly by concerns about care and treatment, but inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from that concern. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 June 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 vaccination checks.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on Friday 21 January 2022. Inspectors gave the home 24 hours’ notice.
They checked infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and the effect of COVID-19-related staffing pressures. They were assured that the home was using PPE safely, supporting testing, managing admissions and visits safely, and keeping its infection control policy up to date.
The home was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of all five areas of care, so the report does not give an overall Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Infection prevention
Inspectors were assured that the home had measures to prevent and manage infections, including safe PPE use, testing and hygiene practices.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Safe visiting
Inspectors were assured that visits were being facilitated in line with the guidance in force at the time.
“We were assured the provider was facilitating visits for people living in the home in accordance with the current guidance.” from the report
Vaccination checks
The home was meeting the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 02How do you keep visiting arrangements in line with the current guidance?
- 03How do you check that non-exempt staff and visiting professionals are vaccinated against COVID-19?
- 04What were the ratings and findings from the most recent full inspection?
- 05How do you make sure infection control policies remain up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the other care areas were not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 February 2022 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 Manor Nursing Home
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.