• Care Home
  • Care home

Cotswolds Rise Residential Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Upper Mill, Purton, Swindon, SN5 4FL (01793) 208090

Provided and run by:
Hartford Care (9) Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Our current view of the service

Good

Updated 28 March 2025

Date of Assessment: 15 April to 25 April 2025. The service is a residential care home providing support to adults of all ages, people living with dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairment. The service can accommodate up to 66 people. At the time of this assessment there were 35 people using this service. This is the first assessment for this service since it registered on 6 October 2023.

The service was clean throughout and had been well maintained. The home was newly built and suitable to meet the needs of people using the service. Regular checks were carried out for health and safety of the premises and equipment. Staff followed good infection prevention and control procedures and had access to personal protective equipment.

People’s needs were assessed prior to an offer of placement. This information was used to produce a personalised care plan for people with risk management guidance. The provider used an electronic care planning system which staff could access on handheld devices. Daily care notes did not always provide evidence of what care and support had been provided. The provider had already identified the need for more training for staff to improve record-keeping and had added an action for this to their service improvement plan.

Staff worked with healthcare professionals to make sure people’s health needs were met. Referrals were completed in a timely manner and people were able to receive a visit from health care professionals at the service. If people needed monitoring for health conditions this was completed and if people’s needs changed this was shared in staff handovers.

Prior to this assessment we received information of concern about staffing numbers. Feedback from people, relatives and staff about staffing numbers was mixed. Some felt there were enough staff whilst others told us more staff were needed. During this assessment we observed there were enough staff available to meet people’s needs safely. Staff had been recruited safely and were provided with training and support. The provider had many systems and processes to support staff wellbeing and promote equality, diversity and inclusion in the workplace.

Staff understood the importance of obtaining consent from people before providing care and support. We observed staff using equipment safely and communicating with people effectively. Staff responded to people in a timely way, and we observed people were comfortable approaching staff for help.

Regular meetings were held for people and relatives to share information about what was happening at the service. This was also an opportunity to get feedback from people and relatives about all aspects of the service provided. The provider had a complaints process and aimed to investigate complaints within specified timescales. However, we found responses to complainants were not always clear on outcomes of the complaints and did not share information on organisations to contact if people were not satisfied with how the complaint was managed.

Medicines were not always managed safely. We found discrepancies with some stock which the service could not account for. Action was taken during the assessment to report discrepancies to relevant external agencies. We observed people’s privacy was not always maintained. Action was taken during the assessment to address poor practice seen.

There was a home manager in post who had applied to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to become registered. Feedback about the management approach was positive. The home manager was approachable and listened to ideas and concerns raised. The provider made sure management were supported with regular visits from regional and central support teams.

People's experience of the service

Updated 28 March 2025

People and relatives told us people were safe and well cared for. Comments included, “Nothing could be better” and “Absolutely [safe] no question at all about that. [Person] is so well cared for it gives me peace of mind.”

Feedback from people and relatives about staffing numbers was mixed. Some felt there were enough staff available. Comments included, “I am not aware of a shortage of staff. It is unusual for them not to have 2 carers available when we want them. I think they are taking on more staff at the moment.” However, some feedback was not as positive about staffing numbers. Comments included, “The staff are always busy and can’t always stop to talk. They do struggle sometimes and could do with more staff.” People did not share any impact from not having enough staff. People felt their needs were being met safely.

People appreciated the staff and told us they were kind and caring. Comments from people included, “Marvelous, everything is good. All the staff are kind and helpful, I feel they know me” and “I can’t fault the staff, they are looking after everyone, they are friendly.”

People’s independence was promoted and staff provided support at people’s own pace. One person told us, “I can shower independently. At one point I needed help but now I am more independent, and staff let me do it.” People were able to spend time where they preferred. Some people preferred their own company in their rooms whilst others enjoyed the communal spaces. One person said, “I spend most of my time in my room which is my choice. I have a call bell and staff come in a couple of minutes.”

People told us they enjoyed the food available, and they had choices. Comments about the food included, “Food is good, and we get choice”, “I always like one of the choices, and I can have a fried breakfast” and “The food is ok, there has been a change in chef. I can ask for something else if I don’t like it, but it is not normally an issue.” Staff sat with people to discreetly encourage people to eat their meal and provide social engagement. We observed there were snacks around the service which people could help themselves to.

People and relatives knew how to raise a complaint if needed and thought the home manager was approachable. Comments included, “The new manager is very approachable so I could talk to [them] any time”, “The manager is very efficient, kind and approachable” and “There is always someone there to talk to.”