You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 23 November 2015

We carried out an inspection of Rivacre House on 5 October 2015 and this was unannounced.

Rivacre House was last inspected on 20 August 2014 and we found that the service met the regulations we inspected against.

Rivacre House is a purpose-built care home for people who have mental health needs. The home is a two storey building located near Ellesmere Port town centre, close to shops and local facilities. The home has twelve single bedrooms. At the time of our inspection there were 11 people who used the service. There is a large lounge and dining area and a separate conservatory on the ground floor and a smaller kitchen and lounge on the first floor.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During our visit we saw that the registered provider provided a safe environment for people to live and staff to work in. There was a warm atmosphere that was enabling and inclusive. People were able to come and go as they wished and staff supported them to make arrangements for appointments or social events.

Staff and the registered manager explained to us what they would do to keep people safe and how they protected their rights. Staff had been provided with training and showed an understanding about safeguarding adults from abuse, Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People said they liked living at Rivacre House and the staff were kind and caring. They said staff provided the support they needed to encourage them to be independent. Staff demonstrated an understanding of disability and how factors such as personal history and gender identity impacted upon mental health. People were encouraged to discuss their health and worries with staff. They had access to community based health professionals as required on order to help keep them well. There were opportunities for people to take part in group activities but they were also encouraged to develop personal interests.

Staff protected people from the risks associated with poor nutrition and hydration as they encouraged them to eat and prepare a balanced diet. People were able to choose meals that met their likes, dislikes and preferences. They were positive about the choice and quality of food available and liked being involved with shopping.

Records that we looked at were comprehensive and kept up to date. Support plans contained detailed information on each person and how their care and support was to be delivered. The information was regularly reviewed with the person who used the service. This meant that people received personalised care in line with their wishes and preferences.

People received supported from staff that had gone through the appropriate recruitment processes to that ensure they were of suitable character to carry out their job. The staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported and knew all about their social, physical and mental health needs. They had the appropriate knowledge, skills and qualifications to do the job. Staff had had access to an induction, training programme and ongoing support.

The management team were approachable, responsive, and encouraged feedback from people who used the service. They also monitored the service provided in order to improve on its quality and effectiveness.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 23 November 2015

The service was safe.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and they were deemed of suitable character and skill to work within the service.

Staff were able to tell us about safeguarding adults and what they would do to protect someone or report concerns. Risk assessments were in place to identify and manage risks to health and safety.

Medication was managed safely and people were given the right medication at the correct time.

Action had been taken to improve infection control processes and the living environment.

Effective

Good

Updated 23 November 2015

The service was effective.

People were offered a choice of meals which they enjoyed. People with specific dietary requirements were supported to access support from appropriate professionals.

Staff had training and support which enabled them to carry out their role effectively.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which meant that people’s rights were protected.

Arrangements were in place to support people to access health and social support to keep them safe and well.

Caring

Good

Updated 23 November 2015

The service was caring.

There was a positive relationship between staff and the people who used the service. Staff involved people in discussions and decision that affected them. Staff knew people well and what their preferred routines were.

Staff showed compassion towards people and treated people with dignity and respect. People’s confidentiality and privacy respected at all times. People were asked before any information was shared about them.

People were supported by an advocate where they did not have a family member to speak on their behalf.

Responsive

Outstanding

Updated 23 November 2015

The service was responsive.

There were varied activities to support people’s social and well-being needs. People who used the service were supported to maintain or develop links with the community and their family and friends.

The care and support that people received was individualised. Staff valued difference and ensured that the needs of people with protected characteristics were met. People were involved in the writing and review of all their support plans.

When people moved into or out of the service, this transition was planned and people supported to manage change.

People were aware of how to raise concerns and were confident that they would be resolved.

Well-led

Good

Updated 23 November 2015

The service was well led.

The registered manager knew the service well and staff felt valued and supported by them.

Regular audits were carried out by the registered provider, registered manager and deputy manager in order to monitor the quality and effectiveness of the service.

There was positive partnership working with other professionals who supported people who the service.

Systems were in place to seek the views of people who used the service and others and to use their feedback to make improvements.