CQC report explained · a care home with nursing
What the CQC found at The Ridings Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2024
Rated Inadequate and placed in special measures; inspectors found serious failings in safety, dignity, consent and management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 and 4 October 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicine records, recruitment files and management records, and observed care.
The home was rated Inadequate overall. Safe, caring and well-led were rated Inadequate. Effective and responsive were rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found risks were not managed well, possible abuse was not always investigated, and people were not consistently treated with dignity or given choice.
The report also found some positive points. Medicines were usually given as prescribed, staff recruitment checks had been completed, people could access healthcare, and some care plans clearly recorded health needs. However, these strengths did not outweigh the serious concerns.
The home was placed in special measures. CQC said it would meet the provider, work with the local authority and normally re-inspect within six months if the provider's registration was not cancelled.
Recruitment checks
The report says staff recruitment was carried out safely, including the required background checks.
“Staff had been recruited safely. Pre-employment checks had been carried out including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks.” from the report
Medicines usually administered correctly
Although some medicines were not stored safely, records showed that people's medicines were administered as prescribed.
“People's medicines were administered as prescribed. Medication records correctly reflected the medications people had received and the remaining medications in stock at the service.” from the report
Access to healthcare
People were supported to use outside healthcare services, and professionals gave positive feedback about working with the home.
“People were supported to access external healthcare support, such as vaccinations, eye tests and chiropody. Professionals gave positive feedback about how the service worked with them.” from the report
Some clear health care planning
The report found clear care plans for some specific health needs, including diabetes, catheter care and modified diets.
“Records showed people with needs such as diabetes, catheter care or modified diets had clear care plans in place.” from the report
People were exposed to safety and infection risks
seriousFire doors were propped open, the home contained clutter and hazardous items, and communal bathrooms and storage arrangements were not hygienic. Some staff did not follow good infection control practices.
“We observed fire doors were routinely propped open by staff, and records indicated this had been highlighted by audit systems for several months.” from the report
Safeguarding was not reliable
seriousPotential abuse, unexplained bruising and allegations of harm were not always investigated or reported. The home also did not learn effectively from falls or other incidents.
“We found several incidents of potential abuse had not been reviewed, investigated and, where appropriate, reported to external agencies.” from the report
People's rights and consent were not protected
seriousSome people were unlawfully deprived of their liberty, and conditions on authorisations were not followed. Staff did not always seek consent or make required best-interest decisions.
“This meant the person was unlawfully deprived of their liberty during that time.” from the report
Dignity and respectful care
seriousInspectors saw people being pushed or pulled and observed poor privacy practices. Staff also used language that reduced people to their care needs.
“People did not always receive compassionate care that upheld their dignity. This was a breach of regulation 10 (Dignity and respect)” from the report
Limited choice and social contact
needs fixingActivities and community visits were not offered to everyone. Some people spent long periods alone, and preferences such as meal choices and room use were not always respected.
“One person's records showed that, other than a monthly entertainer, they had not been engaged in any activities for the last 3 months.” from the report
Weak management oversight
seriousAudits had identified some concerns but did not lead to enough action. The systems used to monitor care, safety, incidents and people's experiences were not effective.
“Quality assurance systems had failed to identify the areas of concern we highlighted during our inspection.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to stop possible abuse and unexplained injuries being missed, investigated or reported?
- 02How have you fixed the fire door, clutter, hazardous equipment and infection control problems identified by inspectors?
- 03How do you now check that staff seek consent and follow best-interest decisions and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards conditions?
- 04What staffing levels and staff training are now in place, particularly for moving and handling, dementia and distressed behaviour?
- 05How will you make sure every person receives suitable activities, community access, communication support and meal choices?
This was an unannounced full inspection covering all five key questions and both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 June 2024 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 2020
The Ridings Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some improvements needed to emergency plans, signage and activities.
This was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection on 25 November 2019. Inspectors reviewed care records, medicines, staffing, training, complaints and quality checks. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers, and observed care.
The inspectors found that people were safe and received effective care. Staff understood people's risks, medicines were managed safely, and people had access to healthcare. Staff supported people with food, drink and communication needs.
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. There were activities and ways to give feedback, although inspectors found that carers were not always involved in activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection published on 10 July 2017.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated compassionately and with dignity. Staff knew what mattered to people and supported privacy and independence.
“People were supported by staff that were caring, compassionate and treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's individual needs, preferences, communication needs and interests. Staff knew people's life histories and used this information in their care.
“People received person centred care and support based on their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Safe care systems
Staff understood safeguarding and individual risks. Medicines, staffing, infection control and accident monitoring were checked and managed.
“Risks to people's safety and wellbeing were assessed and managed.” from the report
Supported staff team
Staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals. They said managers were approachable and they felt supported.
“Staff had received an induction that provided with the training, information and support they required to effectively and safely meet people's needs.” from the report
Signage for people with dementia
minorInspectors discussed improving signs to help people find toilets and lounges. The manager said work towards better signage was planned.
“We discussed with the registered manager improvements that could be made in relation to signage to assist people with Dementia locating toilets and lounges.” from the report
Carers' involvement in activities
needs fixingInspectors saw too much reliance on the two activity coordinators to engage people in activities. The manager agreed that care staff should be more involved when they were not providing care.
“We observed an overreliance on the two activities coordinators to engage with people to do fun activities.” from the report
- 01Have all individual emergency plans been updated, including clear instructions for anyone who cannot move downstairs during a fire?
- 02What changes have been made to signs for toilets and lounges to help people living with dementia find their way?
- 03How are care staff now involved in activities when they are not completing care tasks?
- 04How do you make sure care plans and risk assessments are updated promptly when people's needs change?
- 05What activities are currently available for people with different interests, abilities and support needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and all five ratings were Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 February 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.
Every inspection of The Ridings Care Home
4 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Inadequate.
- June 2024Inadequatecurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: InadequateResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 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
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.