Rose Cottage Residential Home

Updated 29 October 2020

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.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

This inspection took place on 20 October 2020 and was announced. The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

Updated 29 October 2020

This unannounced inspection took place on 29 and 30 November 2018. This is the first comprehensive inspection under its current registration.

Rose Cottage Residential Home is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

At the time of our inspection there were 37 people using the service. Rose Cottage Residential Home can accommodate up to 38 people in individual bedrooms in one single storey building.

Two registered managers were in post and they shared the responsibility for managing the service. 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 service was safe. People were kept safe from harm by staff who had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures. Incidents were identified and acted on. Risks to people were identified and were well managed. Sufficient staff with appropriate skills were in post. The staff recruitment process helped ensure that only suitable staff were employed. Staff adhered to the provider’s policies in maintaining a clean environment. Medicines were recorded accurately and they were administered as prescribed.

The service was effective. People’s needs were met by staff who had relevant training. Staff were supported with supervision and mentoring to gain the necessary skills to meet people's needs. People ate enough healthy and home-cooked meals. People drank sufficient amounts of fluids. Staff enabled people to access health care services. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The registered managers worked with others involved in people’s care, such as health professionals when people moved into the service so they received consistent care.

The service was caring. Staff cared for people with compassion and took account of their individual needs. People’s privacy and dignity was promoted and respected. Advocacy support was provided to those people who needed this. Staff involved people in their care and considered how best to do this. People were cared for without discrimination. Staff respected people's rights to confidentiality.

The service was responsive. People received person centred care that was based upon their preferences. People could be as independent as they wanted to be. Technology was used to enhance the quality of people’s lives. People’s concerns were identified and responded to and this helped drive improvement. People, relatives and staff, were provided with the appropriate support when people needed end of life care.

The service was well-led. The registered managers led by example and ensured staff had the right skills and values. Staff worked as a team to help people and each other. Quality assurance and governance systems were mostly effective in identifying and acting upon improvements when these were needed. People had a say in how the service was run. Staff were given feedback and support with their work in a positive way. An open and honest staff team culture was in place. The registered managers and staff worked in partnership with others who contributed to the quality of people’s care.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.