You are here

Archived: The Rectory Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 February 2015

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 21 January 2015.

The Rectory Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 25 people. The home specialises in the care of people living with dementia.

There is a registered manager in post. 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.

The registered manager had a clear vision for the home. They said their philosophy was “To create an environment that constantly topped up people’s wellbeing.” Staff told us about the culture of the home and this showed the registered managers’ philosophy had been communicated throughout the staff group. One member of staff said “It’s all about treating everyone as an individual and helping them to be as happy as possible.” Another member of staff said “I think the ethos is to create a happy place. I think we achieve that most of the time.”

The atmosphere in the home was very warm and welcoming. There was lots of friendly banter and laughter throughout the day. One person told us “I like it that we have lots of laughs.” Another person said “There’s always a bit of fun to be had.”

Care was responsive to people’s needs and personalised to their wishes and preferences. People were supported to make choices about all aspects of their day to day lives. People were able to choose what time they got up, when they went to bed and how they spent their day.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs in a relaxed and unhurried manner. Staff spent the majority of their time socialising with people. One member of staff told us “We’re not task focussed. Everything is about the people. It’s made clear when you start work the residents and their happiness always come first.”

Risks to people living at the home were minimised because the provider checked all new staff thoroughly to make sure they had the right skills and were safe to work with vulnerable people.

People told us staff were kind and caring. One person said “Everyone is happy and nice.” Another person told us “I’m alright here. All the girls are lovely to me.” Staff showed patience and understanding when supporting people.

People took part in a range of organised and impromptu activities. People were also involved in small tasks around the home such as laying tables for lunch and simple cooking. People were able to access the local community and the home had formed links with local groups and schools.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed to make sure they received a diet in line with their needs and wishes. At lunch time people were able to choose where they ate their meal and were shown different meals to assist them to make a choice. People were able to eat their meals in an unhurried manner and were provided with discreet assistance when they required support.

Staff monitored people’s physical and mental wellbeing. Where there were concerns about a person, health care professionals were involved to make sure people received appropriate care and treatment.

Staff ensured people were happy to be assisted and were consenting to their care and treatment. Throughout our visit people were offered choices and were given time to respond to questions and suggestions. Staff explained what was happening and gave people opportunities to refuse offers of help or support.

The registered manager sought people’s feedback and took action to address issues raised. Relatives and professionals told us the home encouraged them to share any concerns and worries with them. One relative told us “I could definitely talk to the manager if I had any concerns.”

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 February 2015

The service was safe.

Risks to people were minimised because the provider had a robust recruitment procedure which ensured all staff were thoroughly checked before they began work.

Staff had a good understanding how to recognise and report abuse to make sure people were protected.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs.

People received their medicines safely from staff who had received appropriate training to carry out the task.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 February 2015

The service was effective.

People were cared for by well trained staff who had access to on-going professional support and guidance.

Staff ensured people were happy to be assisted and were consenting to their care and treatment.

People had access to health care professionals to monitor their health and make sure they received appropriate treatment.

People had their nutritional needs assessed to make sure they received an adequate diet.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 February 2015

The service was caring.

People were cared for by staff who were friendly and kind.

Each person had their own bedroom and their privacy was respected.

People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about their care and support.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 February 2015

The service was responsive.

People received care that was responsive to their needs and personalised to their wishes and preferences.

People were able to take part in a variety of organised and impromptu activities.

People’s complaints and concerns were effectively dealt with.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 February 2015

The service was well led.

The registered manager was open and approachable and people appeared very comfortable and relaxed with them.

People received care and support from a staff team who were well supported and were committed to the visions and values of the home.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and seek people’s views.