Archived: Rosewyn House

People told us they were offered choices at Rosewyn. We were told people could make choices regarding the times they got up and returned to bed, what they did during the day and what they ate. However, it was not always clear to see how these choices were offered to people.

We found the provider had ensured people were protected against abuse by the training and guidance that had been implemented for staff. We also evidenced the provider had ensured a robust and effective recruitment procedure was completed prior to appointing new staff.

We found that at certain times of the day there were potentially insufficient staff to meet people's assessed needs. We were told by staff, people who used the service and their relatives that the busiest time of day was late afternoon when the two care staff on duty were expected to prepare the evening meal, provide care and activities.

We noted that people's privacy and dignity was not fully respected during conversations between staff. We were concerned regarding the manner in which one of the registered providers and registered manager referred to a person who used the service, during a conversation with us. The terminology and language used was not respectful towards the person.

We saw people had some choice regarding how they spent their day. However, the staffing levels in the home dictated when some people received their care.

People who used the service were not safeguarded from abuse as not all staff had received appropriate training. We saw there was not a clear audit trail when the home supported one person with their money. This did not ensure the person was supported in accordance with their wishes.

People were supported with their medicines and protected against associated risks.

The home ensured records were up to date and people's personal and confidential information was stored securely.

We saw there were not locks fitted to bedroom doors, although people had been asked if they required one. There were also some toilet and bathroom doors that were not able to be locked. This had been identified by the registered manager and we were told locks were to be fitted.

People told us their privacy and dignity was respected by staff knocking on the door of their bedroom and bathrooms prior to entering. We saw staff were discreet when asking people, who were sitting in communal areas, if they needed support with their personal care.

It was not clear if people were provided with their own underwear or that used by others as some underwear in the home was not labelled with people's names.

People were not consistently provided with a choice of meal and some people were not aware of what they were having for their main meal of the day.

We found the care plan documentation did not fully evidence that people's choices and care needs were not consistently met.

People told us that they did not feel they had choices around what time they got up in the morning, and if they wanted to stay in bed.

People who used the service told us the food was very good and that there was plenty provided. We were told by people who lived at Rosewyn that they did not always know what they were having for lunch until it arrived. We were told that a choice is provided if people ask for it.

People who used the service told us the home was always clean and tidy. Comments made included; 'the cleaners are always busy' and 'My room is always kept lovely'

We found people's personal and confidential records were not stored securely or appropriately.

We observed some practices in the home that did not fully respect people's dignity, for example the procedures on leaving the dining room. People said 'it is like being back at school' and 'this does not respect my dignity'

We found the care plan documentation did not fully evidence that people's care needs were consistently met.

People who used the service told us the cooks were very good and the food provided was tasty. We were told there was more of a choice of food at the tea time meal than the main meal of the day which was served at lunchtime. The choice offered to people at lunchtime was carried out informally, and choices were only offered if people asked for something different.

People who used the service told us the home was always clean and tidy. Comments made included; 'the home is always so clean and my bedroom is cleaned every day. The whole home smells lovely', 'everywhere is always clean and tidy, the staff work very hard to keep it nice', and 'everywhere is beautifully clean and I don't have to do anything to keep it like that, the staff do it all'.

We found people's personal and confidential records were not stored securely or appropriately.