You are here

Rose Cottage Nursing Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile


Review carried out on 8 July 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Rose Cottage Nursing Home on 8 July 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Rose Cottage Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 14 December 2018

During a routine inspection

About the service: Rose Cottage Nursing Home is a nursing care home that provides accommodation and personal or nursing care to people aged 65 and over. There were 18 living at the service at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

• At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. However, we have made a recommendation about the effectiveness of the quality assurance systems being used to monitor the quality of care being delivered. This was because the quality auditing tools being used to monitor the service had not always been effective in identifying potential risks to people. This had no impact on people as they were supported by an established staff team who knew people well and how they should be supported.

• Feedback from people and their relatives about the care people received was positive. They complimented the caring nature of staff and felt that the service was well-led.

• People praised the approach of staff and stated that they felt their relatives were safe living at Rose Cottage Nursing Home.

• People’s needs had been assessed and their support requirements were recorded in detail to provide staff with the guidance they needed to support people.

• People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives.

• Effective systems were in place to manage people’s medicines so that they received them safely and on time.

• People were supported to access health care services and to maintain a healthy lifestyle.

• Sufficient numbers of staff were available to ensure people’s safety and well-being. New staff were suitably vetted and trained before they supported people.

• Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and had been trained to carry out their role. They understood their responsibility to report concerns and poor practices.

• The registered manager worked alongside staff which enabled them to have a good understanding of people’s current needs.

The service met the characteristics of Good in four of the five key questions and an overall rating of Good. More information is in ‘Detailed Findings’ below.

Rating at last inspection: Good (Last report was published on 24 June 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating at the last inspection.

Follow up: The rating of this inspection and the information and intelligence that we receive about the service will determine the timeframe of our next inspection.

Inspection carried out on 23 May 2016

During a routine inspection

We inspected this service on 23 May 2016. This inspection was unannounced. Rose Cottage provides care for up to 21 older people requiring nursing or personal care. On the day of our inspection 21 people were living at the service.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 felt safe living at Rose Cottage. People’s individual risks were assessed and management plans how to reduce these risks were in place. People received their medicines safely and as prescribed. Appropriate records were kept when medicines were administered to people. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Staff were clear about their responsibilities to identify abuse and to report any concerns to protect people who lived at the service.

Staff received regular training appropriate to their roles. Staff told us they felt valued and well supported by the management and their colleagues. The registered manager followed safe recruitment processes.

The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. DoLS provides legal safeguards for people who may be unable to make their own decisions or who may be deprived of their liberty for their own safety.

People were provided with a choice of food and drink that met their nutritional needs. People told us they were happy with the food and confirmed they were able to choose what they wanted to eat. People were supported to meet their health care needs. This included proactive referrals to various specialist services and professionals to source further advice if required.

Staff supported people in a caring and friendly manner. People were happy with how care was provided. They made positive comments about the staff and the support received. People had access to an in-house activities programme. People told us they enjoyed the activities but could choose not to participate if they preferred.

People’s needs were assessed prior to admission to ensure their needs could be met by the service. Care records were detailed and contained details of people’s personal histories, health issues, their likes, dislikes and preferences. Care plans and risk assessments had been reviewed on a regular basis to ensure the planned care was working, or if changes needed to be made.

People we spoke with said they had no complaints, but would feel comfortable speaking to staff if needed. We saw that when concerns had been raised these had been logged, investigated and resolved promptly .The registered manager sought people’s opinions through a yearly satisfaction survey and regular meetings.

The registered manager conducted regular audits to monitor the quality of service. There was an open and transparent culture and staff spoke positively about the management and the team. Accidents and incidents were recorded, investigated and the records confirmed appropriate action was taken when people had been involved in an accident or incident.

Inspection carried out on 19 July 2013

During a routine inspection

We found that the provider had effective systems to gain and review consent from people, which was then acted upon. Before people received any care they were assessed to identify their needs before consenting to the support they were given. We were told that options had been explained to them in plain English, which they understood.

Staff showed that they were aware of the needs of the people in their care and the level of support that each person required. People and their relatives made positive comments about the dedication and quality of care provided by staff. One person said, �The quality of nursing is very good. When I first came here I only weighed four stones and now I�m back up to nine. They look after me so well.� A relative told us, �I can�t praise the staff enough. Mum had been in hospital for nine weeks and had gone down hill fast. We feared the worst but they have coaxed and nursed her back to health. It�s amazing.�

The home effectively managed medicines and ensured that people received them at the times they needed them in a safe and dignified way.

The provider had effective recruitment and selection procedures. This meant that people were safe and their health and welfare needs were met by staff who were fit, appropriately qualified and able to do their job.

The home had an effective complaints procedure which demonstrated a commitment to recording, investigating and resolving complaints to the satisfaction of the person who used the service.

Inspection carried out on 23 July 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with three people who gave us detailed information about the care they received. They all were very complimentary about the care and the staff in the home. They told us that they trusted the staff and were treated respectfully. One person said �I can�t praise the staff highly enough and they provide me with exactly what care I need�.

Inspection carried out on 21 September 2011

During a routine inspection

People appreciated the care they received and said they were treated with respect. Some people were cared for in bed and they were less able to express their views. Staff were friendly and they spoke to people appropriately.

People had individual care plans which helped to ensure that staff were aware of each person�s needs and the care they required. However, the plans lacked the detail which would help staff to support people in a person centred way.

People enjoyed the individual attention they received from the home�s activities co-ordinator. However not everybody experienced the same level of engagement. Staff said that they would like to be able to spend more time with people who stayed in their bedrooms during the day.

Staff told us they were meeting people�s needs, but said that changes in the staffing arrangements had affected the quality of service they were able to provide. At lunchtime, we saw that people would benefit from more individual support and attention.

People told us that they felt safe in the home. Arrangements were being made which helped to maintain people�s health and well being. However, some areas such as the bathrooms were not being well checked, which meant that there was a risk to people�s safety.