This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 22 February 2017. We returned on 27 February 2017 to complete the inspection. The service was last inspected in October 2014, was rated as good and was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulation. Ridge House is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to 15 older people. The home does not provide nursing care. At the time of our inspection there were 14 people living at Ridge House.
When we visited 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.
The registered manager and staff team were inspired to provide exceptional care to people. The atmosphere in the home was warm and very friendly. People had developed strong relationships with staff. This was evident throughout our inspection with the general conversations and banter which were observed. People commented: “I feel part of the family” and “Its outstanding here. The kindness, the atmosphere.”
People and their relatives told us the most wonderful comments about the staff and the home. Comments included: “Fantastic here, excellent”; “They (staff) are charming, kind”; “We are very lucky” and “You couldn’t better it. This is better than the Ritz.”
People received extremely personalised care and support specific to their needs and preferences. There was an excellent understanding of seeing each person as an individual, with their own social and cultural diversity, values and beliefs. A staff member commented: “We get to know the person first and then plan their support needs with them.”
All staff took pride in their work and our conversations with them showed they worked as a team to create a better quality of life for people.
The registered manager provided strong leadership and was a good role model for all staff. They had established a service where staff were clear about the values and ethos of the home. The service had a positive culture that was person-centred, open, inclusive and empowering.
People felt safe and staff were able to demonstrate a good understanding of what constituted abuse and how to report if concerns were raised. Measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible to protect people’s freedom. People’s rights were protected because the service followed the appropriate legal processes. Medicines were safely managed on people’s behalf.
People’s views and suggestions were taken into account to improve the service. They were supported to maintain a balanced diet. Health and social care professionals were involved in people’s care to ensure they received the right care and treatment.
There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. Staffing arrangements were flexible in order to meet people’s individual needs. Staff received training and regular support to keep their skills up to date in order to support people appropriately.
The providers took an active role running the home, for example by carrying out maintenance, or helping to cover for staff during sickness and holidays, and were present in the home on a daily basis. The registered manager and providers told us that working alongside staff on a regular basis enabled them to fully understand every person’s care needs.
People and their relatives spoke fondly of the registered manager, providers and their staff team. They felt the service was an inspiration due to how it was run. One person commented: “I feel the management and staff are exceptional.” There was a sense of collaboration between the registered manager, staff, relatives, visitors and people living at the home; all with the goal to make the home a pleasant place to live, work and visit.
The registered manager strived to provide the best possible service for people. A number of effective methods were used to assess the quality and safety of the service people received and changes and improvements were made in response.