You are here

Keychange Charity Rose Lawn Care Home Outstanding

We are carrying out a review of quality at Keychange Charity Rose Lawn Care Home. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Outstanding

Updated 22 February 2017

This comprehensive inspection took place on 23 November 2016 and was unannounced. The service was previously inspected in May 2014 when the service was found compliant with all the standards inspected.

The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 29 older adults. At the time of inspection there were 28 people living at the home. The service provides care for older people, some of whom are living with dementia or physical frailty.

The home is a large well maintained detached house on the outskirts of Sidmouth. All bedrooms are for single occupancy, although some are large enough to accommodate couples if requested.

The home was well run by a registered manager who was supported by an experienced deputy and other senior staff. 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 and staff were proactive in looking for ways to improve the home and the services provided. They did this in consultation with people living in the home and their families. Minutes of resident meetings showed how they had made suggestions about mealtimes which had led to the time of lunch being altered.

The registered manager described how the emphasis was on all staff taking responsibility for leadership. As part of this, the registered manager and her deputy had introduced a ‘traffic light’ card system to ensure that people’s needs were dealt with in a timely manner by team leaders and care staff. This system was monitored regularly to ensure its effectiveness.

The registered manager took quality assurance very seriously. This involved getting feedback from people, relatives and staff. Staff were encouraged to be involved in quality improvements. Trustees and senior staff from the provider organisation visited the home on a regular basis and also monitored the quality and safety of the home. Regular audits were undertaken to ensure the quality of the home and the care provided was reviewed. Where shortfalls were identified, actions were taken to address the issues.

Meals were served so that people could select from a choice of dishes and accompaniments. People praised the standard of the food and were encouraged to discuss menus and preferences. People were supported to eat and drink in a relaxed and supportive manner by staff who worked to promote a pleasant meal time experience.

The atmosphere of the home was one of constant stimulation whether on a one to one basis or through group activities. People were encouraged to continue their own interests as well as join in a programme of activities which ran throughout the day and evening. These included regular sessions of exercise, discussion groups, singing, musical entertainment and art classes. Additionally there were special events run which included a ‘pub quiz’ and a fashion show which people had taken part in. People were also supported to go out either individually or as a group. Trips had been organised including a visit to a local zoo. People described how much they enjoyed the wide range of activities. Staff were well-organised, working as a team while maintaining a relaxed and unrushed manner.

Visitors to the home, including relatives and health professionals, praised the care of the staff. Everyone we spoke with said the registered manager and her deputy were always available to discuss care and were open to suggestions about how the home could be improved. People felt safe and well cared for. Staff were attentive to people's needs and supported them quickly and effectively. Staff consistently demonstrated affection and warmth in their relationships with people. People commented how staff were “lovely” and “really wonderful.” T

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was safe.

Recruitment processes were robust. Detailed interview processes and checks were undertaken to ensure new staff had the right attitude as well as skills.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe and promote their physical, emotional and social needs.

People were protected from the risks of abuse by staff who understood their responsibilities.

Medicines were stored, recorded and administered safely.

The home was very well maintained and provided a comfortable, safe place for people.

Risks to people had been assessed and supported people to be safe whilst minimising any restrictions on them.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was effective.

The home had areas where people could mix and socialise in a relaxed and inviting environment.

People were supported by competent staff who had the necessary skills and knowledge. Staff were provided an induction when they first joined and refresher training from time to time.

People were supported to maintain a healthy, balanced diet. Menus offered choice. Meals were seen as important times to provide social stimulation as well as good food. People described the food as really good.

Staff understood their responsibilities and ensure they worked within the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were supported to access health services.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was very caring.

People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate.

Staff knew people well and showed concern for their well-being. The service recognised the skills and achievements of people and supported them to continue these.

People were involved in making decisions about their care.

People were treated with dignity and respect. People’s families were able to visit when they wanted.

People were supported to have a comfortable and dignified death.

Responsive

Outstanding

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was outstanding in providing responsive support.

People were able to make choices about all aspects of their daily lives. Staff took account of people's previous lifestyles and wishes when planning and delivering care.

There was an excellent programme of activities and social events for people to choose from, meaning people were well occupied and stimulated if this was their choice. This included intellectual stimulation such as discussion groups, arts, music as well as exercise.

People felt comfortable to make a complaint and said they felt these were dealt without delay and in a way that led to a resolution they were happy with.

Well-led

Outstanding

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was very well–led.

The home promoted a positive culture and involved people, their relatives and staff in developing the service.

The registered manager looked at innovative ways to improve the service taking into account feedback from people, their relatives and staff.

Staff and people knew the registered manager and said they felt they were supported by them.

Checks and audits to ensure the quality of the service were undertaken and actions were completed to make improvements where issues were identified.