We carried out a review of the data available to us about Roselands on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Roselands, you can give feedback on this service.
About the service
Roselands is a residential care home, a large house set over two floors and with a large garden, providing personal care to 15 people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 15 people with a learning disability.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Whilst the size of the service is not in line with best practice guidance would recommend for people with learning disabilities, the service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.
Right Support
Staff supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence to be independent and they had control over their own lives.
Staff focussed on people’s strengths and promoted what they could do, so people had fulfilling and meaningful everyday life.
Staff supported people to pursue their interests.
Right Care
People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people’s privacy and dignity. They understood and responded to their individual needs.
Staff understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse. The service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it.
The service had enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.
People could communicate with staff and understand information given to them because staff supported them consistently and understood their individual communication needs.
Right Culture
People led inclusive and empowered lives because of the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff.
People received good quality care, support and treatment because sufficient numbers of trained staff could meet their needs and wishes.
People were supported by staff who understood best practice in relation to the wide range of strengths, impairments or sensitivities people with a learning disability and/or autistic people may have. This meant people received compassionate and empowering care that was tailored to their needs.
Staff knew and understood people well and were responsive, supporting their aspirations to live a quality life of their choosing.
People told us or indicated they were happy living at the service. Relatives felt their loved one were safe living at Roselands. People were relaxed in the company of each other and staff and there was a relaxed and happy atmosphere. People were protected from the risks of abuse by staff who understood their responsibilities in relation to keeping people safe.
People were supported by a regular team of staff who had been recruited safely. Staff who knew people well and understood how best to communicate with them in a way they could understand.
The service was clean and there were robust infection prevention and control measures in place. Staff wore appropriate personal protective equipment.
Effective checks and audits on the quality and safety of the service were regularly completed. When shortfalls were identified, action was taken to address these.
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection to assess that the service is applying the principles of right support right care right culture.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Roselands is a residential care home for 15 people with learning disabilities.
Rating at last inspection
At the last inspection on 21 October 2015, the service was rated Good. The service was rated Outstanding in the Responsive domain.
Rating at this inspection
At this inspection we found the service remained Good and was Good in the Responsive domain.
Why the service is rated Good
People told us they were happy living at the service and that it was well managed. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. There were always enough staff to keep people safe. Risks relating to people’s care and support were assessed and mitigated and people were supported to be as independent as possible.
People told us that staff were kind and caring. Staff treated people with respect and dignity. People led active lives and participated in a range of activities both inside and outside of the service. People told us they were looking forward to performing a show for their friends and relatives and that they were proud of their recent fundraising efforts.
The kitchen was open and people were supported to prepare drinks and food when they were able. People took it in turns to shop for meals and choose what they wanted to eat. Staff had made prompt referrals to healthcare professionals when they needed additional support and advice. People and their relatives told us they saw a doctor when they were unwell and received their medicines when they needed them.
Staff knew how to recognise and respond to abuse and the registered manager had reported any safeguarding concerns to the local authority. Action had been taken to minimise the risk of them happening again. There had been no complaints since our last inspection. People and their relatives told us they were happy with the support provided. Regular feedback was sought from people and their relatives. All the feedback we saw was positive, and included comments such as, ‘Due to the high standard of care and management overall it is impossibly difficult to offer any suggestions in this delightfully peaceful and happy environment.’
Staff received appropriate training and were supported by the registered manager to carry out their roles effectively. The registered manager completed a range of checks on the service, including care plan reviews, environmental checks and weekly audits of medicines to ensure people were safe. Regular fire drills were held so people knew how to evacuate the service in an emergency. Staff were recruited safely. The Care Quality Commission had been notified of important events within the service, as required by law.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection was carried out on 21 October 2015 and was unannounced.
Roselands provides accommodation for up to 15 people who have a learning disability and who need support with their personal care. Accommodation is arranged over two floors and most bedrooms have en suite facilities. There were 15 people living at the service at the time of our inspection.
The registered manager was present throughout our inspection. 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, a deputy manager, assistant manager and senior staff, provided leadership to the staff and led by example. Staff were motivated and felt supported by the registered manager and management team. The staff team had a clear vision of the aims of the service which was based on equality and mutual respect. Staff treated people as individuals and gave each person centred support. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and they were confident and positive about her management style.
There were enough staff, who knew people well, to meet peoples’ needs. Peoples’ needs, appointments and activities had been considered when deciding how many staff were required on each shift. Staff were checked before they started to work at the service to make sure they were safe and suitable to work with people. Staff were trained and supported to provide safe care. Staff met regularly with the registered manager to discuss their role and practice and any concerns they had.
Staff knew the signs of abuse and were confident about how to raise a concern. Emergency plans were in place and staff knew how to keep people safe in an emergency. Possible risks to people had been identified and were managed to keep people as safe as possible without restricting them in any way.
People’s needs had been assessed to identify the care they required. Care and support was planned with people and reviewed to make sure people continued to have the support they needed. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible. Detailed guidance was provided to staff about how to provide all areas of the care and support people needed.
Medicines were stored and administered safely. People had the support they needed to remain healthy and well. Staff responded to any changes in people’s health needs, people told us that staff always called their doctor if they felt unwell. Staff had worked very closely with health professionals, especially from the local community team, which had led to good outcomes for people.
The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. Arrangements were in place to check if people were at risk of being deprived of their liberty. Systems were in operation to obtain consent from people and to comply with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to make decisions and choices about all aspects of their lives.
People were supported to participate in hobbies and activities that they enjoyed. There was a lovely atmosphere, with lots of laughter, people told us about their holidays and about fundraising events that had helped to plan and organise. People were involved in planning the menu and cooking meals and were supported to have a balanced diet; everyone said the food was very good.
A variety of equipment was provided to support people to remain as independent as possible. Staff listened to what people told them and responded appropriately. People were treated with respect and their privacy and dignity was maintained. People told us that they had no complaints and if they did they would speak to the staff who would listen to them and take action.
The caring and enabling attitude of the registered manager and staff team was very clear. All staff had an unconditional positive regard for everyone they supported, staff spoke about supporting people to achieve their goals and ambitions and about the importance of supporting people to lead fulfilling, meaningful lives.
The environment was safe, clean and homely. Maintenance and refurbishment plans were in place. Safety checks were completed regularly. Everyone had their own bedroom which was very personalised, most with en suite facilities and people told us that their bedrooms were comfortable.
The registered manager completed regular checks of the quality of the service provided. When shortfalls were found action was taken quickly to address these and prevent them from occurring again. People, their relatives and staff were asked about their experiences of the care. These were used to improve and develop the service.
Accurate records were kept about the care and support people received and about the day to day running of the service. This provided staff with the information they needed to provide safe and consistent care and support to people. Information was provided to people in a way that was suitable for them.
We looked at the care records of four people who used the service. We saw that each person had a set of care records that were individual to their needs and contained detailed information about their mental and physical health needs. We saw that they were person centred as they included people's likes and dislikes along with photos of family members and friends. We observed members of staff encouraging interactions with people by talking about their photos and experiences.
We looked at staffing and recruitment records and spoke with staff. We saw that the manager had carried out relevant checks for new staff when they joined the service to ensure that they were suitable for the role.
We looked at how the service monitored quality. We saw that there were systems in place at a local and corporate level. The service also took on board the comments from people who used the service to make improvements.
Most people who use the service had difficulty with verbal communication and we found that staff knew the people who use the service very well. They were able to "tune in" to peoples needs and adjust their communication to enable individuals to easily understand what was being communicated. We found that staff worked together to create a relaxed yet vibrant atmosphere and focused on working therapeutically to meet peoples individual needs and wishes holistically and in a person focused manner.