You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 25 May 2017

Roseland is a care home which provides accommodation and personal care for a maximum of 39 older people, some of whom may also be living with dementia. The service does not provide nursing care and the provider was in the process of removing the regulated activities associated with nursing care. There were 35 people living at Roseland at the time of our inspection.

The inspection took place on 4 May 2017 and was announced.

The home had a registered manager. 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.

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 7 December 2016. At that inspection we found one breach of legal requirements. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to maintaining appropriate records. We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This inspection found that the provider had taken the action they told us they had. This report only covers our findings in relation to the leadership of the service. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Roseland on our website at www.cqc.org.uk”.

The management team had worked hard to improve the standard of record keeping across the service. As such, we found that records were now a much better reflection of the support provided to people. Care plans and risk assessments now provided more information to ensure that new and temporary staff were able to deliver care in the same way as those staff who worked more regularly at the service.

The service was well-led and people praised the way the service was managed. The culture was open and person-centred. People and their representatives were encouraged to share their views and were routinely consulted about proposed changes and developments for the service.

There were systems in place to regularly audit and improve the service delivered. The provider had taken on board the recommendation from our previous inspection to adopt more formal systems for monitoring events within the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 18 February 2017

The service was safe.

People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse, avoidable harm or discrimination because staff understood their roles and responsibilities in protecting them.

Risks to people were identified and managed.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs. Appropriate checks were undertaken to ensure only suitable staff were employed.

There were good systems in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 18 February 2017

The service was effective.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Training and support were provided to ensure care staff undertook their roles and responsibilities in line with best practice.

Staff routinely gained consent from people and understood the importance of providing care in the least restrictive way.

People had choice and control over their meals and were supported to maintain good hydration and a balanced diet.

Staff worked in partnership with other health care professionals to help keep people healthy and well.

Caring

Good

Updated 18 February 2017

The service was caring.

The atmosphere at Roseland was friendly and welcoming. People had positive relationships with staff who knew them well.

Staff respected people’s privacy and promoted their dignity at all times.

People were actively involved in making decisions about their care and staff understood the importance of respecting supporting them to live their lives as they wished.

Responsive

Good

Updated 18 February 2017

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their changing needs.

People had regular opportunities to engage in activities and outings that were meaningful to them.

People were confident about expressing their feelings. The management team ensured that if people raised issues that they were listened to and acted upon.

Well-led

Good

Updated 25 May 2017

The service was well-led.

The documentation in place now better reflected the high quality care and support that was being provided.

The culture within the service was open and positive and care was provided in a way which ensured the person was always at the centre.

People benefitted from a leadership team who were committed to maintaining the quality and the safe running of the service.