You are here

Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home Good

We are carrying out a review of quality at Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 25 May 2017

This unannounced inspection took place on 15 February 2017. We last carried out an inspection in April 2014 and rated the service as good.

Ravenstone Care and Rehabilitation Home (Ravenstone) provides care and accommodation for up to 13 people with mental health needs. The building has three storeys that have been adapted for use as a residential care home. Each person had their own room and there are lounge and dining facilities on the ground floor.

Ravenstone was flooded in December 2015. At the time the people who lived there had to be found temporary accommodation. Ravenstone staff and the registered manager continued to provide support to people while they awaited significant rebuilding and refurbishment works to be completed. The service lost much of its paper records in the flood. When we inspected the home had just re-opened and was accommodating six of its former residents.

The service 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.

The service managed medicines appropriately. They were correctly stored, monitored and administered in accordance with the prescription. People were supported to maintain their health and to access health services if needed. People who required support with eating and drinking received it and had their nutrition and hydration support needs regularly assessed.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. They were trained to an appropriate standard and received regular supervision and appraisal. As part of their recruitment process the service carried out background checks on new staff.

Where people were not able to make important decisions about their lives the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were followed to protect their rights. Staff were aware of how to identify and report abuse. There were also policies in place that outlined what to do if staff had concerns about the practice of a colleague.

Care plans were subject to regular review to ensure they met people’s changing needs. They were easy to read, based on assessment and reflected the needs of people. Risk assessments were carried out and plans were put in place to reduce risks to people’s safety and welfare.

Staff had developed good relationships with people and communicated in a kind and friendly manner. They were aware of how to treat people with dignity and respect. Policies were in place that outlined acceptable standards in this area.

There was a complaints procedure in place that outlined how to make a complaint and how long it would take to deal with. People were aware of how to raise a complaint and who to speak to about any concerns they had. There were no outstanding complaints in the service.

The home was well led by a registered manager who had a vision for the future of the service. A quality assurance system was in place that was utilised to improve the service.

Inspection areas



Updated 25 May 2017

The service was safe.

There were sufficient numbers of appropriately trained staff.

Appropriate checks were carried out during the recruitment of staff.

Staff knew how to identify and report potential abuse.



Updated 25 May 2017

The service was effective.

Staff were trained and supported to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to provide the care people required.

The service worked in conjunction with other health and social care providers to try to ensure good outcomes for people who used the service.

People received adequate support with nutrition and hydration.



Updated 25 May 2017

The service was caring.

People told us they felt they were well cared for.

Staff treated people in a dignified manner.

There were policies and procedures in place to ensure people were not discriminated against.



Updated 25 May 2017

The service was responsive to people’s needs.

People made choices about their lives and were included in decisions about their care. They were included in planning the care they received.

Support plans were written in a clear and concise way so that they could be easily understood.

People were able to raise issues with the service in a number of ways including formally via a complaints process.



Updated 25 May 2017

The service was well-led.

The service had a robust quality assurance system in place.

The registered manager had a vision for the future of the service.

People knew how to contact a member of the management team if they needed.