CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Rookery
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, hygiene, social distancing, safe admissions and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this targeted visit, so no rating was given.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this targeted visit, so no rating was given.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this targeted visit, so no rating was given.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this targeted visit, so no rating was given.
What inspectors found, March 2021
The Rookery: inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and COVID-19 safety arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 23 February 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than carrying out a full inspection of the home.
Inspectors were assured that visitors, admissions, testing, personal protective equipment, hygiene, social distancing and outbreak arrangements were being managed safely. Staff understood people's individual COVID-19 risks and the plans for an outbreak.
People were given information about COVID-19, vaccinations and restrictions in accessible formats. They were supported to keep in touch with family and friends, take part in activities and use the local community safely.
The service was recorded as 'Inspected but not rated'. This means the report did not give a full overall quality rating or ratings for all five areas of care.
COVID-19 information
People were kept informed about COVID-19, vaccinations and lockdown restrictions. Information was made accessible.
“People were being kept informed about COVID-19, the vaccination programme and lockdown restrictions.” from the report
Staff understanding
Staff understood people's individual COVID-19 needs and risks, as well as what to do if there was an outbreak.
“Staff demonstrated a detailed understanding and insight into people's individual needs and risks in relation to COVID-19.” from the report
Safe infection control
Inspectors were assured that PPE, testing, hygiene, social distancing and outbreak arrangements were being managed safely.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Maintaining contact and activities
People took part in activities and used video calls and social media to maintain contact with family and friends.
“People told us about the activities they have participated in to keep them busy and prevent them feeling socially isolated.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the home's current full CQC rating, since this inspection was not rated?
- 02How are people supported if they need to isolate, and how do you protect their mental health and wellbeing during that time?
- 03How do you keep families informed about COVID-19, vaccinations and any restrictions?
- 04How do you support people to maintain contact with family and friends when visits are limited?
- 05How do staff identify and manage each person's individual COVID-19 risks?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide ratings for the other four questions or a full overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 March 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.
What inspectors found, September 2019
The Rookery was rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with some recording and safety checks needing improvement.
This was a scheduled, comprehensive inspection. The first visit was unannounced and the second was announced. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, clean surroundings, detailed care plans and support that promoted choice, independence and involvement.
There were some areas to improve. These included checks of steep stairs, recording fridge temperatures for medicines, pain assessment information, medicines preferences, and food and fluid records. The manager said action would be taken, and some additional paperwork had already been introduced after the inspection.
The home had also been rated Good in all five areas at the previous inspection in August 2016. The report says the home remained Good and would be checked again under the normal inspection schedule for services with this rating.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, develop skills and take part in activities that could increase their independence. Staff used the least restrictive approach possible.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests;” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were observed showing compassion and taking time to have meaningful conversations. They respected privacy and encouraged people to do tasks for themselves where possible.
“Staff showed empathy, kindness and compassion. They placed value on their caring roles and involvement in people's lives.” from the report
Detailed care planning
Care records described people's needs, preferences, communication and risks in detail. Staff showed they understood how to support people with different needs.
“Care records contained detailed assessments and risk management plans for areas of care including changes in people's behaviour, mental health presentation, malnutrition and falls.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People took part in one-to-one and group activities, including work on the farm and activities in the community. Staff also supported contact with relatives and important people.
“People living at The Rookery participated in one to one and group activities, including accessing the onsite working farm.” from the report
Management and checks
The home had regular audits, staff supervision and meetings. Inspectors found the management team open to feedback and focused on addressing shortfalls.
“The service had governance arrangements in place and completed regular internal quality checks and audits.” from the report
Environmental safety checks
needs fixingInspectors found some risks linked to steep stairs that were not included in environmental audits and some people's care records. The manager agreed to include these areas in future monitoring.
“We identified some environmental risks such as access to steep flights of stairs, that we felt should be incorporated into the environmental audits and safety checks” from the report
Medicine fridge records
needs fixingMedicines were stored at the correct temperature, but daily temperature records were missing. This meant the records did not fully show that the temperature had been maintained.
“daily temperature records were not in place to give assurance that the temperatures had been correctly maintained.” from the report
Food and fluid records
minorInspectors found variation in how food and fluid monitoring paperwork was completed. The management team said it was working with staff to improve consistency.
“We identified some variation in the recording of people's food and fluid monitoring paperwork.” from the report
Signs around the home
minorBathrooms, toilets, bedrooms and communal areas did not have signs to help people find their way around. The manager said alternative ways of providing this support would be explored.
“Bathrooms, toilets, bedrooms and communal areas did not have signage to assist people with familiarising themselves within the environment.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to include steep stairs in environmental safety checks and relevant care records?
- 02How are medicine refrigerator temperatures recorded each day now?
- 03How do staff assess pain for people who cannot tell them verbally that they are in pain?
- 04How are each person's preferred ways of taking medicines recorded and shared with staff?
- 05How do you ensure food, fluid and weight records are completed consistently?
This was a scheduled, comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the first day unannounced and the second day announced. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 September 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 The Rookery
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.