- Care home
Riverside Care Home
Assessment report published 2 April 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 10 March to 19 March 2026.Riverside Care Home is a care home without nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this assessment. The service can accommodate up to 50 people. At the time of our assessment there were 45 people using the service.
The assessment was prompted in part by notification of a safeguarding incident. This is subject to further investigation by CQC as to whether any regulatory action should be taken. We also had to follow up on action we told the previous provider to take at the last assessment in October 2025. At that assessment, the provider was found to be in breach of 3 legal regulations in relation to safeguarding, person centred care and good governance. Warning notices were issued.
At this assessment, we found the provider had made progress in addressing previous regulatory breaches, particularly in relation to risk management, governance and oversight. Improvements had been made to how risks associated with people’s health, medical and care needs were assessed, recorded and monitored. Staff and people using the service told us they had seen positive changes since the last assessment. However, we identified new concerns in relation to medicines management. While medicines had previously been managed safely, we found they were not always received, stored, administered or disposed of safely at this assessment. The registered manager acknowledged these concerns and confirmed immediate action would be taken.
People were safeguarded from harm through established systems and clear reporting processes. Staff understood their responsibilities and there was a comprehensive safeguarding policy outlining how to escalate concerns. Infection prevention and control arrangements were effective, and staff followed appropriate procedures to help keep people safe.
The service continued to operate in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff had a good understanding of people’s individual needs and supported them to make decisions wherever possible. People and relatives were involved in discussions about their care, and regular meetings provided opportunities for feedback and involvement in the running of the home.
Staff were recruited safely, and there were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Staff received training relevant to their roles and had regular supervision to support ongoing development.
Leadership within the service had strengthened. The management team demonstrated a clear commitment to improvement and had taken steps to strengthen oversight through more robust quality assurance systems. Audit processes had improved, and actions were now recorded and followed up to ensure continued progress. The nominated individual and management team assured us that improvements would continue to be embedded to support sustained positive change.
People's experience of this service
People were positive about the quality of the care provided. People said they felt safe and generally happy living there. Comments included,” “Yes, I am happy with her care. I don’t sit here and worry about what is happening. They go above and beyond so I feel I can step back.” Another person said, “I am [happy] I bless myself that [loved one] is in there.”
People said they were treated with dignity and respect. Comments included, “100% they treat us with respect” and “Yes, they do treat us all with respect.”
Our observations and discussions with staff demonstrated how staff knew people well and made sure people were at the centre of the care and support they received. People told us staff were friendly, helpful and competent in their role. Comments included, “Staff do chat when they are helping me, I think they are supportive.” Another person said, “All the staff are friendly really. I haven’t a bad word about any staff.”
None of the people we spoke to had needed to complain about the service, but everyone we spoke to said they knew how to do this if they needed to, and everyone said they felt the managers at the service were approachable. One relative said, “No complaints” another said, “There is nothing to complain about in any shape or form.”
People’s care and support needs were effectively met. Following an initial assessment each person had a plan devised to meet their needs and help them to achieve their goals. People were kept safe from avoidable harm because staff knew them well and understood how to protect them from abuse. People lived safely and free from unwarranted restrictions because the service assessed, monitored, and managed safety well. People were supported to have choice and control and to make decisions about their care, treatment, and wellbeing. People told us when they needed the help of health professionals for example the GP or dentist, the service supported them to be seen promptly.