You are here

Roseacre Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 27 July 2019

About the service: Roseacre provides accommodation with personal care for up to 22 people. There were 17 older people using the service at the time of our inspection.

People’s experience of using the service:

Some people were not able to tell us verbally about their experience of living at Roseacre. Therefore, we observed the interactions between people and the staff supporting them.

Staff were kind and spent time chatting with people as they moved around the service. However, we did identify some records made by staff which did not always demonstrate a caring or empathetic approach.

There were some concerns with the environment. Damaged walls, a damaged sink surround, stained and marked furniture, and a bolted fire door were identified during this inspection. The fire service have been contacted and will visit the service to provide advice.

Some people’s sinks did not have plugs, some soap dispensers were empty and there was no provision for a towel or paper towels to use in a communally used toilet.

People were provided with the equipment they had been assessed as needing to meet their needs. For example, pressure relieving mattresses. These were correctly set for the person using them.

Staff were recruited safely in sufficient numbers to ensure people’s needs were met.

Staff had received appropriate training and support to enable them to carry out their role safely, including the management of medicines.

There were some activities provided for people. However, the activities did not always relate to the detailed information gathered by staff which identified people’s specific interests and preferences.

Not everyone living at the service had a care plan. Risk assessments did not always provide staff with sufficient guidance and direction to provide person-centred care and support. Some staff were being inappropriately touched by people living at the service. Pre-assessment information showed this was a known risk but this had not been recorded and addressed in care plans. There was no guidance on how staff could protect themselves.

Many quality monitoring systems were in place. However, the audit process had not always enabled the provider to identify the concerns found at this inspection. Staff did not always have enough information about people who had not been living at Roseacre for very long. This meant they may not have been able to support them according to their needs and preferences.

A recent survey sent out to people and their families had positive responses. We had received information from an anonymous source that their complaints had not been addressed to their satisfaction. Complaints were recorded and responses were seen. The registered manager told us there were no on-going complaints at the time of this inspection.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated as Good (report published 2 September 2017)

Due to breaches of the regulations identified at this inspection the service rating has changed. The rating for Roseacre is now Requires Improvement.

Why we inspected: This inspection was bought forward following several anonymous concerns being received by CQC. Concerns had been raised about the quality of the support provided to some people, the approach of the management, concerns about the premises, infection control concerns and a lack of staff in the lounge areas at times and at weekends. One person told us they felt their complaint had not been resolved.

We specifically reviewed these areas during this comprehensive inspection. We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the safe, effective, responsive and well-led sections of this report.. Not all the concerns raised to us were upheld.

Follow up: We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return t

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 27 July 2019

The service was not always safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 27 July 2019

The service was not always effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.



Updated 27 July 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 27 July 2019

The service was not always responsive

Details are in our Responsive findings below


Requires improvement

Updated 27 July 2019

The service was not always well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.