Rose House

We found the following examples of good practice.

Visitors to the home were required to show a negative LFT test, have their temperature taken and complete a form to ensure they were not showing any symptoms of illness. Personal protective equipment (PPE) was then supplied. Professional visitors were also asked to show evidence of vaccination status.

Family members were supported to maintain contact with their relatives. Relatives were supported to be essential care givers. A range of visiting arrangements were available such as face to face visits or window visits and video and telephone calls.

Social distancing was observed as far as it was practicable to do so. Staff wore appropriate PPE, regularly washed their hands and applied hand sanitiser. Staff had completed training in infection control, COVID-19 and putting on and taking off PPE.

Staff and people using the service took part in the home’s testing programme. Action was swiftly taken when anyone tested positive for COVID-19.

People who were required to isolate in their bedrooms had a ‘forget me not’ booklet where staff recorded positive interaction. This showed people’s wellbeing had been considered.

The home was visibly clean. Staff had access to appropriate cleaning products and cleaning schedules included high touch areas such as door handles and handrails, which were cleaned regularly.

We found the following examples of good practice.

Visitors to the home were required to have their temperature taken in the entrance area and fill out a form to ensure they were not showing any symptoms of illness. Personal protective equipment (PPE) was then supplied.

Family members had been supported to maintain contact with their relatives via the use of a pod, window visits and video and telephone calls. The home had a procedure in place to support face to face family visits.

Social distancing was observed as far as it was practicable to do so. Staff wore appropriate PPE, regularly washed their hands and applied hand sanitiser. Staff had completed training in infection control, COVID-19 and putting on and taking off PPE.

Staff and people using the service took part in the home’s testing programme. Action was swiftly taken when anyone tested positive for COVID-19.

People who were required to isolate in their bedrooms had a ‘forget me not’ booklet where staff recorded positive interaction. This showed people’s wellbeing had been considered.

The home was clean and there were no malodours. Staff had access to appropriate cleaning products and cleaning schedules included high touch areas such as door handles and handrails, which were cleaned regularly.

We were assured that this service met good infection prevention and control guidelines.

The inspection took place on 12 June 2018 and was unannounced. The last comprehensive inspection took place in January 2016 when the service was rated Good. You can read the report from our last inspections, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Rose House’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk. At this inspection we found the service had remained Good.

At the time of this inspection the service had a registered manager. 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.

People who used the service were protected from the risks of abuse. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding people and told us they would report any concerning matter to their line manager without delay. Risks associated with people’s care were identified and managed appropriately. We observed staff interacting with people and found there was enough staff available to meet people’s needs in a timely manner.

Accidents and incidents were monitored and appropriate actions taken to minimise reoccurrences. The home was clean but some areas were in need of attention. We spoke with the registered manager who was already aware of these issues and had started to take action to address them.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to complete their role well. People received personalised care and their choices were respected. People received a balanced diet and the meal time experience was pleasant. Health care professionals were accessed when needed and their advice was followed. Staff had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and people’s consent was sought in line with current legislation.

We observed staff interacting with people and found that they respected people and showed kindness. Staff ensured that people’s privacy and dignity was respected.

People received personalised care which met their needs. People we spoke with felt able to raise concerns and told us the registered manager and staff were approachable. End of life care choices were considered and recorded in care records.

The service was well led and the registered provider had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service. Audits took place at regular intervals and actions were taken to make changes when required. People who used the service, their relatives and staff had several opportunities to voice their opinions and to be involved in the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The service has a registered manager who has been registered with the Care Quality Commission since September 2013. 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.

Rose House is a care home situated in Armthorpe Doncaster which is registered to accommodate up to 31 people. The service is provided by Runwood Homes Limited. At the time of this inspection there were 21 people living at the home. Accommodation is provided on both the ground and first floor. The service has several communal and dining areas and easily accessible secure gardens. The home is close to local amenities of shops and healthcare facilities.

The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were in place to protect people who may not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) sets out what must be done to make sure that the human rights of people who may lack mental capacity to make decisions are protected, including balancing autonomy and protection in relation to consent or refusal of care or treatment.

People’s physical health was monitored as required. This included the monitoring of people’s health conditions and symptoms so appropriate referrals to health professionals could be made.

There were sufficient staff with the right skills and competencies to meet the assessed needs of people living in the home. Staff told us they felt supported by the manager and provider however, formal supervisions and appraisals were still being transferred onto Runwood Homes Limited’s documentation.

Staff were aware of people’s nutritional needs and made sure they supported people to have a healthy diet, with choices of a good variety of food and drink. People we spoke with told us they enjoyed the meals and there was always something on the menu they liked.

People were able to access some activities although there was no dedicated activity co-ordinator. People told us they had enjoyed Christmas with parties and involvement from the local community. Some people told us they would like more activities as sometimes there was not sufficient happening to prevent them becoming bored.

There was a strong and visible person centred culture in the service. (Person centred means that care is tailored to meet the needs and aspirations of each individual.) We found the service had a friendly relaxed atmosphere which felt homely. Staff approached people in a kind and caring way which encouraged people to express how and when they needed support. Everyone we spoke with told us that they felt that the staff knew them and their likes and dislikes.

Staff told us they felt supported and they could raise any concerns with the registered manager and felt that they were listened to. People told us they were aware of the complaints procedure and said staff would assist them if they needed to use it. We noted from the records that no formal complaints had been received since the transfer of services in September 2014.

There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. However, we were unable to see how effective they were embedded as audits were relatively new following their registration in September 2015. We saw copies of reports produced by the registered manager and the provider. The reports included any actions required and these were checked each month to determine progress. The regional care director shared an action plan with us that the registered manager was working towards. The action plan related to objectives set by Runwood Homes Limited