You are here

Archived: Appledale Cottage Residential Home Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 11 May 2016

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 12 January 2016, 25 and 26 February 2016 and 17 March 2016.

The home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for adults who require nursing care and who may have a dementia related illness. The home is jointly owned and one owner is also the registered manager. A maximum of ten people can live at the home. There were seven people living at home on the days of the inspection. 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.

At the last inspection on 1 June 2015 we asked the provider to take action to make improvements in how people consented to their care and how the provider records reflected the care people received to ensure that it met their needs. The provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements and this action had been taken.

People felt safe in the home and relatives told us that they felt assured their family members were supported in a safe way with staff that helped to keep them safe. Staff told us about how they kept people safe from the risk of potential abuse. During our inspection staff were available for people and were able to support them by offering guidance or care that reduced their risks. People told us they received their medicines as prescribed and at the correct time. They also felt that if they needed extra pain relief or other medicines these were provided. People told us there were enough staff to support them when they needed or wanted help or assistance.

People told us staff knew what care they needed and relatives felt assured the staff were trained in how to look after the needs of people who lived at the home. All staff we spoke with felt supported by the manager and were able to discuss their role or training needs.

People told us they enjoyed the food and that it was well prepared and always available. Where needed people they were supported to eat or had their meal prepared in an alternative way such as softer options. People had not always been involved in the planning of their care due to their capacity to make decisions. However, relatives felt they were involved in the care of their family member and were asked for their opinions and input. People had access to other healthcare professionals that provided treatment, advice and guidance to support their health needs.

Staff developed positive, respectful relationships with people and were kind and caring in their approach. People told us and we saw that their privacy and dignity were respected and staff were kind to them. People received supported to have their choices and decisions respected and staff were considerate of promoting their privacy and dignity. Staff anticipated people’s care needs and attended to people in a gentle and unhurried way.

People told us they had chosen to maintain their hobbies and interests and we saw people were happily knitting, reading or listening to music. Staff offered encouragement and supported people to go out on trips with friends and local community groups.

People and relatives we spoke with told us they would happily raise any complaints with the registered manager. However they had not needed to follow or use the provider’s complaints policy as they were happy with their care.

Management and staff had implemented recent improvements to record keeping which showed how they made changes to people’s care or medicines. These would need to be regularly reviewed to ensure people’s care and support needs continued to be met. People and relatives felt they were involved the home and that it suited them well. The registered manager regularly checked th

Inspection areas



Updated 11 May 2016

The service was safe.

The provider had looked at protecting people�s safety and well-being. People received their medicines when needed and were supported by enough staff.



Updated 11 May 2016

The service was effective.

People had been supported to ensure their consent to care and support had been assessed correctly. People�s dietary needs and preferences were supported by trained staff. Input from other health professionals had been used when required to meet people�s health needs.



Updated 11 May 2016

The service was caring.

People received care that met their needs. Staff provided care that met people�s needs whilst being respectful of their privacy and dignity and took account of people�s individual preferences.



Updated 11 May 2016

The service was responsive.

People were able to make choices and their views of care were listened to People were able to continue their personal interests and hobbies if they wanted. People were supported by staff or relatives to raise any comments or concerns.


Requires improvement

Updated 11 May 2016

The service was not always well-led.

Improvements were needed to ensure effective records were in place where changes to care were being made.

People�s care and treatment had been reviewed by the registered manager. Procedures were in place to identify areas of concern and improve people�s experiences. People, their relative�s and staff were complimentary about the overall service and felt their views listened to.