Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Richan Care (Midlands)

Five Rivers Living Residential Home

12 Sangha Close, Leicester, LE3 9SW

Goodpublished 27 August 2025, 12 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2023

Five Rivers Living Residential Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks to safety, dignity, staffing and personalised care.

This was an unannounced inspection over two days. Inspectors spoke with people living there, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files and management records.

The home was not always safe. People faced risks from falls, missing call bells, pressure injuries, poor cleanliness and infection control. Staffing levels were not always enough, and agency staff were used frequently. Medicines were administered safely and records were up to date.

Care was not always effective, caring or personalised. Staff training had significant gaps. People were not always treated with dignity, their care plans were not always accurate, and there were few activities or meaningful interactions.

The overall rating and all five question ratings are Requires Improvement. The last rating under the previous provider was Inadequate, published on 7 March 2023, so the rating had improved but the inspectors still found several breaches and an increased risk of harm.

What inspectors praised

  • Medicines

    Inspectors observed medicines being given safely. Medicines records were complete and current.

    “Records were well maintained and up to date, supporting safe medicine practices.” from the report

  • Specialist diets

    People with specialist diets and eating requirements received food and drink prepared appropriately.

    “People with specialist diets and eating requirements received food and drink prepared appropriately for their needs.” from the report

  • Mental capacity support

    Mental capacity assessments were detailed and considered people's wishes and best interests. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards conditions were being met.

    “Mental capacity assessments were detailed and considered people's needs, personal wishes and best interests.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Safety and call bells

    serious

    Some people were left without a call bell, so they could not reliably summon help. Inspectors also found risks involving falls, pressure injuries and emergency evacuation plans.

    “I can wait a long time sometimes. I don't have a buzzer in my bedroom.” from the report

  • Cleanliness and infection control

    serious

    The home and some equipment were visibly dirty. Inspectors found unpleasant odours and examples of poor hygiene, including a dirty dressing and toothbrush.

    “Service cleanliness was poor, equipment was not kept clean, and unpleasant odours were observed.” from the report

  • Staffing and training

    serious

    People sometimes waited a long time for staff, and the home frequently relied on agency staff. Training records had significant gaps, including training needed for personal and end of life care.

    “Insufficient staffing was a breach of regulation 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report

  • Dignity

    serious

    Staff did not always communicate with people during meals or hoist transfers. Inspectors also found inconsistent support with oral care and a lack of end of life care guidance.

    “People were not always treated with dignity and respect.” from the report

  • Personalised care

    serious

    Care plans were not always accurate, current or available to the people they described. Communication cards and emotional support records were not always used or completed as required.

    “Care was not always personalised to people's needs.” from the report

  • Activities and social contact

    needs fixing

    There were few activities and limited meaningful interaction from staff. Inspectors said people were at risk of social isolation.

    “There was a lack of meaningful engagement from staff. We observed minimal interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How have you made sure every person at risk of falls or pressure injuries has an up-to-date plan and the right staff support?
  2. 02Can every resident now call for help from their bedroom, and how do you check the system works?
  3. 03What training have staff completed in personal care, end of life care and the other areas identified as missing?
  4. 04What has changed to improve cleanliness, equipment cleaning and infection control?
  5. 05What activities and daily interactions are now available, and how do you prevent people becoming socially isolated?

This was the first inspection of the newly registered service and covered all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided; the previous Inadequate rating was under the previous provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 December 2023 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Five Rivers Living Residential Home

4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.

  1. December 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingup from Inadequate
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Five Rivers Living Residential Home →

  2. March 2023Inadequatedown from Requires improvement
    Safe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
  3. May 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
  4. January 2021Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
  5. September 2020Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
  6. July 2023

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 July 2023.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

About live-in careHow PrimeCarers works
Nearby

Other care homes near Leicester

All in Leicester

The Chantry

Leicester, LE3 · 1.0 km
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Willow House

Leicester, LE3 · 1.4 km
Good
Residential
Rated 4 years agocare home

Bellerose Manor

Leicester, LE3 · 1.4 km
Not yet rated
ResidentialDementia
Not yet ratedcare home

Waring Close

Leicester, LE3 · 1.5 km
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home