Archived: Rosemont Residential Home

Updated 27 October 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This unannounced inspection took place on 4 October 2016. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.

We requested and were provided with a Provider Information Return (PIR) from the provider prior to the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make. Before the inspection we reviewed information held about the service and notifications of incidents we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

During the inspection we spoke with eight people who were able to express their views about living at Rosemont and two visiting relatives. We spoke with a visiting professional during the inspection visit. Prior to the inspection visit we spoke with a member of the local quality assurance team.

We looked around the service and observed care and support being provided by staff. We looked at the care and support records for three people living at the service including medicine records. We looked at two records relating to staff recruitment, staff duty rosters, staff training records and records relating to the running of the service.

Updated 27 October 2016

We carried out this unannounced inspection of Rosemont on 4 October 2016. Rosemont provides residential care for up to 15 people. On the day of the inspection there were 14 people using the service. Rosemont is situated in an elevated position of Newton Ferrers. It has a ground floor and split level first floor served by stair lifts. People could move around freely without restriction and there is a front conservatory where people often sit overlooking the estuary below.

During the previous inspection in September 2014 we found there were breaches of regulations. Care plans did not always provide enough information about how risks associated with care were going to be managed. There was no evidence staff were being supported in their role. The service was not being monitored for quality and audit purposes. At this inspection we found improvements had been made in these areas and the service was now meeting the relevant requirements’.

The service had 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.

On the day of the inspection visit there was a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the service. We observed staff had a good relationship with people and supported them in a caring and respectful way. People were being cared for by competent and experienced staff. A family member told us, “I just can’t thank the staff enough. (Person’s name) has settled so well but a lot of that is because the staff have been wonderful.”

The service had taken action to improve the recording of people’s care needs and associated risks. Development was on-going to transfer the current care planning system onto an electronic system which would provide a more structured information record and include prompts for staff. For example, staff would be automatically alerted when care plan reviews were due.

Systems for supporting staff had been improved. Staff were receiving regular supervision meetings with the registered manager and annual appraisals to look at personal development and training. A staff member told us, “I feel very supported by the manager. Always there for you.” Staff meetings and regular daily updates were used to share information about operational issues.

Action had been taken to improve how Rosemont monitored the quality of the service people received. This included regular meetings with staff. Informal and formal meetings with people using the service and their families. The registered manager was carrying out regular reviews of policies and procedures as well as being part of an external care association which looked at current good practice in the care sector.

Checks had been made and were in date for the maintenance and servicing of gas, electric and fire systems. All other equipment used by the service to support people were well maintained and regularly serviced as per equipment guidance.

Staff understood the needs of people they supported, so they could respond to them effectively. They told us they felt supported and had the resources they needed to carry out their role. Comments included, “(Registered managers name) is very supportive to us (staff). They help us out if we need that extra support” and, “There have been a lot of changes”.

Staff supported people to be involved in and make decisions about their daily lives. There were systems in place to help ensure staff acted in accordance with legal requirements under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. This was to protect people and uphold people’s rights where they faced restrictions due to lack of mental capacity.

There were a range of activities for people to be involved in. This included games to support people with memory loss. A bowling set designed specifically for people with hand or co-ordination issues had recently been delivered and was providing a lot of interest. In addition entertainers visited the service on a regular basis. There was a library available and one person told us they particularly liked to use this as they were a keen reader. Where people chose not to be part of any activities this was respected by staff.

Staff received a thorough induction when they started working at the service. Training was regularly refreshed and staff told us it was effective. Recruitment processes were satisfactory; for example pre-employment checks had been completed to help ensure staff were suitable to work in the care sector.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff had received training to help them identify possible signs of abuse and knew what action they should take. Staff told us they supported people in a way that kept people safe.

People received their medicines when they needed them and staff knew how to administer and record medicines safely.

People told us they knew how to complain and would be happy to speak with the provider if they had any concerns. No concerns had been reported since the previous inspection.

People using the service and visitors all described the management of the service as open and approachable and thought people received good care and support. Relatives told us, “We chose this home because it’s local and when we visited we knew it was right for (Persons name)” and “I am always made to feel welcome. The manager and the staff tell me what’s going on with (Persons name).”