CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ryton Towers
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safe medicines management, enough trained staff and appropriate infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for this question. It says staff were trained, worked effectively with health professionals and followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives gave very positive feedback about staff's kindness and understanding. People were involved in decisions and supported to maintain their dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was tailored to people's needs and preferences. Inspectors highlighted exceptional end-of-life care, detailed care planning, varied activities and support to maintain relationships and community links.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive culture and supportive management. Audits, action plans and staff and residents' meetings were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding responsive care and especially strong support at the end of life.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 10 May 2023. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience visited. They spoke with six people living there, 10 relatives and eight staff, observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found people were safe. Risks were assessed, medicines were managed properly and there were enough trained staff. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and staff understood their needs and preferences.
The home was rated Outstanding for being responsive. Inspectors found highly personalised support, including detailed end-of-life plans, varied activities and strong links with the local community. Safe, caring and well-led were rated Good.
The overall rating remained Good, as it was at the previous inspection published on 17 May 2018. The responsive rating improved from Good to Outstanding.
End-of-life support
People and families were involved in planning how end-of-life care should be provided. The home also offered practical and emotional support to families and staff.
“People received exceptional care at the end of their lives.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were helped to follow their interests and take part in activities suited to them. This included links with a local school, a community choir and a weekly Gentleman's Club.
“People were actively supported to be part of the community in the service and the local area.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and knowledgeable. Inspectors observed people being treated with dignity and supported to remain independent.
“People and relatives said staff were kind, caring and knew people's needs and preferences well.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines records were accurate, staff had their competence checked and audits were completed. Inspectors also found enough appropriately trained staff to care for people safely.
“Medicines were managed and stored safely. Medicines records were accurate.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you use the end-of-life questionnaire to record and follow my relative's wishes?
- 02Which activities and community links would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?
- 03How would staff use the electronic care planning and daily handover system to share my relative's changing needs?
- 04What staffing arrangements would be used if there were short-notice staff absences?
- 05What dementia information or training is available for relatives?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the overall service and the Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led questions; the report does not give a separate Effective rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 July 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 2021
Overall rating remained Good; this targeted inspection was not rated and found good infection control and incident management.
The inspection took place without warning on 19 January 2021. One inspector reviewed infection prevention and control, incident records and staffing levels after an incident in December 2020.
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy. Staff had suitable protective equipment and used it properly. The home was managing testing, visitors, social distancing, admissions and possible outbreaks.
The provider recorded and reviewed accidents and incidents. The findings were used to look for patterns and learn lessons.
This was a targeted inspection, not a full review. The service was inspected but not rated, so the previous overall rating of Good remained unchanged. The previous inspection was published on 30 June 2018.
Infection control
The home was clean and tidy, and staff had and used the protective equipment they needed.
“Staff had access to the personal protective equipment (PPE) they needed and used this appropriately.” from the report
Managing infection risks
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for visitors, testing, admissions, social distancing and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The provider recorded accidents and incidents, analysed them and used the results to look for patterns and learn lessons.
“Incidents and accidents were analysed. The findings were used to help identify trends and learn lessons.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The provider supported people to keep in contact with their relatives.
“The provider supported people to keep in contact with relatives.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What happened after the December 2020 incident, and what changes were made as a result?
- 02How do you check that infection prevention and control procedures remain up to date and are followed by staff?
- 03What staffing levels are in place on each shift, and how have you responded to the previous anonymous concerns about staffing?
- 04How are accidents and incidents reviewed, and how will you tell families about lessons learned?
- 05How can residents keep in contact with their relatives, including during infection outbreaks?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, incident management and staffing levels; it did not assess the whole service, so the previous ratings remained in place. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 February 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.
Every inspection of Ryton Towers
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 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
48 live-in carers within about an hour of Gateshead
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 £1,240 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.