You are here

The Rylands Nursing and Residential Home Good

We are carrying out checks at The Rylands Nursing and Residential Home. We will publish a report when our check is complete.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 November 2016

This inspection took place on 15 September 2016 and was unannounced. The Ryland’s is a residential and nursing home that provides personal care and accommodation, diagnostic and screening procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury for up to 42 older people some of whom are living with dementia, at the time of the inspection there were 32 people living at the service.

The service did not have a registered manager in post on the day of the inspection. The service had been without a registered manager for one month prior to the inspection. The provider told us the current manager would be making an application to be registered in the near future. 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.

People told us they felt safe. People received support from staff that were knowledgeable about their responsibilities to identify and report any concerns related to the abuse of vulnerable adults. Care plans included risk assessments and where risks were identified management, plans were in place to minimise the risk. Peoples' medicines were managed safely. The provider had recruitment processes in place to ensure people were supported by staff that were suitable to work with vulnerable people. There was enough staff to meet people’s needs safely.

People received support from knowledgeable staff who had access to good support from the provider. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005(MCA) and supported people in line with the principles of the act. People enjoyed the food, could choose what to eat and had their dietary needs met. People received support to access health professionals to maintain and improve their health.

People had developed caring relationships with staff. People were asked for their views and could make choices about their care and support. People were encouraged to be independent. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and protected their privacy.

People had their needs assessed and care plans were in place which identified peoples individual needs and preferences. People could maintain their hobbies and had access to individual and group activities. People were able to make complaints and felt these would be dealt with effectively.

People were positive and complimentary about the management of the service. People felt involved in the service and were asked about their experiences. The provider looked for ways to improve the quality of the service people received and had effective monitoring systems in place.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 8 November 2016

The service was safe.

People received support from staff who understood their responsibilities in protecting people from harm.

Risks to people were assessed and plans were in place to manage risks to people’s health and safety.

There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs.

People’s medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 November 2016

The service was effective

Staff were well supported and received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs.

People were supported by staff who understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People had their dietary requirements met and had a choice of food and drink.

People had access to health professionals to maintain their health.

Caring

Good

Updated 8 November 2016

The service was caring

People had developed caring relationships with staff.

People were able to make choices about their care and support.

Staff understood the importance of people maintaining their independence and encouraged them to do so.

People were treated with dignity and their privacy was protected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 8 November 2016

The service was responsive.

People's needs were assessed and care plans were personalised and contained information to ensure their individual needs were met.

People were positive about their opportunities to maintain their hobbies and enjoyed the group activities provided.

People had access to a complaints procedure and felt confident any concerns would be dealt with.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 November 2016

The service was well-led.

People, relatives, and staff were positive about how the service was run.

The culture was open and inclusive and people felt they could influence change.

The provider looked for continual improvements and monitored the effectiveness of the service people received.