You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Roseacre. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 September 2017

The inspection took place on the 14 and 17 August 2017 and was unannounced on both days. Roseacre provides care and accommodation for up to 22 older people some of whom are living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 18 people living in the service.

We received information about concerns in relation to the service. The concerns were in respect of how the home was run down. These included dangerous ripped carpets, no running hot water in some bathrooms, no cleaning products, continence equipment shared and not being cleaned. Information included that people were bored with no activities and not given proper personal care, concerns about staff conduct on the night shift and concerns that often only two members of staff were on duty at weekends for 20 residents.

We also received concerns that the service had poor hygiene. Staff didn’t use gloves and aprons and people’s rooms were filthy and bells were unplugged. MAR (medicines administration record) were tampered with and filled in later. During this inspection we found all of these concerns to be unsubstantiated.

We visited at 7am and met and observed the night staff and spoke to people who used the service, staff, visitors and a healthcare professional.

There was 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.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good overall.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good in all areas.

Why the service is rated good.

One person said; “I’m happy with all of them (staff).” Another person said; “I’m very happy here.” A visitor said; “People we visit always have their needs met.” A relative said; “I find this a well presented, clean and tidy home.” Another said; “We are so glad mum came here. She seems so happy and that makes us happy.”

People remained safe at Roseacre because they received their medicines safely and from staff that had received medicines training. People, relatives, visitors and staff told us there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. Risk assessments had been completed to help people to retain as much independence as possible and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others.

People continued to receive care from a staff team that had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. Staff received regular training and updates and were competent. People were supported to have as much choice and control of their lives as possible. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People's healthcare needs were monitored by the staff and people had access to healthcare professionals according to their individual needs.

People said the staff were kind and very caring. One relative said; “She always looks well cared for and settled.” A visitor said; “Everyone seems very comfortable.” There was mainly a calm atmosphere in the service with staff supporting people with their care needs discreetly. When people started to become anxious staff intervened and people soon settled. People's privacy was respected. People where possible, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support people received.

The service remained responsive to people's individual needs. Care and support was personalised to each individual which helped ensure people were able to make choices about their day to day lives. Complaints were fully investigated and responded to. One person said; “I’ve never had any complaints to make here. But […] (naming the registered manager, provider and other senior staff) would help me sort it.”

People were assisted to take par

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 September 2017

The service remained Good

Effective

Good

Updated 2 September 2017

The service remained Good

Caring

Good

Updated 2 September 2017

The service remained Good

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 September 2017

The service remained Good

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 September 2017

The service remained Good