The report said the care home had “no formal strategy in place” to address risks and monitor progress.<\/p>\n
It added the provider had told inspectors: “I know I’ve taken my eye off the ball, I don’t have a service improvement plan, it’s all in my head.”<\/p>\n
The CQC gives care homes an overall rating and also scores them across five criteria.<\/p>\n
Rosehill House was judged “inadequate” overall, with safety and leadership also deemed as such.<\/p>\n
Effectiveness and responsiveness were rated as “requiring improvement”, while the the caring criteria was judged “good”.<\/p>\n
The report said: “The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.”<\/p>\n
Ms Hill-Eades said she was “delighted” the CQC had recognised the good care given to residents and the home was “committed and focused” to improve processes. <\/p>\n
“We aim to have all improvements in place prior to the CQC reinspection and hope we will once again attain a good overall status,” she said.<\/p>\n
A previous inspection in 2018 had judged the home “good” overall.<\/p>\n
At the time of the inspection, 18 people lived there, though the care home can accommodate up to 23 people with a physical disability, a sensory impairment or living with dementia. <\/p>\n
The CQC said it would return to check on the care home’s progress.<\/p>\n
“We have told leaders where we expect to see rapid improvements and will continue to monitor the home closely to keep people safe while this happens,” Ms Marsden said.<\/p>\n
Ms Hill-Eades said residents and their families had been informed of the CQC’s findings and they were grateful for the support received from them.<\/p>\n
She added: “I am truly sorry for any anguish we have caused our residents, their families, our staff and partner organisations.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The report said the care home had “no formal strategy in place” to address risks and monitor progress.…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":181924,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4316],"tags":[105,4348,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-181923","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-healthcare","8":"tag-health","9":"tag-healthcare","10":"tag-uk","11":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114677836910135115","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/181923","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=181923"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/181923\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/181924"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=181923"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=181923"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=181923"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}