Archived: Resthaven Residential Home

Resthaven Residential Home can provide accommodation for up to 18 people. There were 16 people using the service at the time of our inspection.

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask:

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found. This summary is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with people using the service, their relatives, staff supporting people and the registered manager:

Is the service safe?

The service was generally safe.

People felt safe living at the service. They felt confident that any concerns they had would be listened to and dealt with quickly. Staff knew how to keep people safe.

When people had accidents the most appropriate and safe action was taken to make sure they received the treatment they needed. There were systems in place to make sure that the manager and staff learned from accidents and incidents.

Cleaning substances were stored in a way that did not always protect people from potential harm.

Is the service effective?

The service was generally effective.

People were able to express their views about what mattered to them. Regular surveys were carried out and the results analysed to highlight any areas of improvement.

Staff we spoke with had knowledge and understanding of people's needs and knew people's routines and how they liked to be supported.

No records were kept to show that cleaning schedules were followed or that cleaning tasks were carried out consistently.

Refurbishment of the service was being carried out but there was no maintenance plan in place.

Is the service caring?

The service was caring.

Staff understood people's needs and provided care with kindness, respect and compassion. Staff showed patience when supporting people and promoted their independence.

People and their relatives told us that staff and the registered manager were caring. One person said, 'The staff are really considerate'.

Relatives told us that they were involved and informed with the care of their loved ones. People and their relatives were happy with their care.

There was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere at the service. People looked very comfortable with the staff that supported them. Staff listened to what people said and acted promptly when they asked for something. People chatted with each other and with staff and looked at ease. Two people we spoke with told us, 'We have been friends for a long time. We sit and chat. I can spend time in my room when I want or come in here. It's up to me'.

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive.

People and their relatives knew how to complain and felt they would be listened to if they raised any concerns with the registered manager. One person said, 'I have never had any need to complain but I would if I needed to'.

The service worked closely with health and social care professionals to maintain and improve people's health and well-being.

Is the service well-led?

The service was well led.

There was a management structure in place and quality assurance processes were in place. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and that they felt supported by the registered manager.

People and their relatives told us that the staff and the registered manager were approachable. People were given the opportunity to comment on the service provided and their views were taken into account. Visitors were able to complete a 'Quality Assurance Monitoring' form after their visit which gave an opportunity to comment on any areas for improvement.

People looked comfortable and at ease with each other and staff. One person said "The staff are friendly." Another person said 'My mother has a laugh and joke with the staff, she enjoys this'.

Staff we spoke with had knowledge of people's needs and knew their routines. One person told us, 'The staff are very good, they listen to you'. People told us that staff supported them to remain as independent as they wanted to be. Everyone we spoke with told us that there were enough staff to meet their needs.

People we spoke with said that they enjoyed the food at the service and had a choice of meals. We observed people having meals at times that suited them. The service had taken action to support people at risk of malnutrition.

The premises were suitable to meet the needs of the people who used the service. A maintenance plan was in place and we found that refurbishment work was taking place.

The provider had assessed and managed risks to people using the service and others.

We found that the provider did not have a process in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service people received. People were not asked for their views of the service they received.

People told us that they felt safe and well looked after. People looked relaxed and comfortable with each other and staff. One person said "I get on well with the staff and appreciate what they do." Another person said 'They treat me with respect, I feel safe here.' We saw that the staff were friendly, one person told us 'this is my home now'.

People said that they thought the staff were kind and caring. People said "It's very nice living here. They look after us very well." and "The staff have never refused to do anything for me".

Everyone said that the food was 'very good' and that they always had a choice. One person said "I enjoy the food here very much. They make the most beautiful cakes".

We spent time with people and observed interactions between the people and the staff.

The staff we spoke with had knowledge and understanding of people's needs and knew people's routines and how they liked to be supported.

We saw people receiving their medication in a safe way, and that ordering, storage and disposals processes were in place.

We found that the provider had not been notifying us of certain events required by the regulations.