Archived: Roseland Care Limited

Updated 20 July 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 checked 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.

The inspection took place on 21 June 2016. The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors and a specialist nurse advisor. This is an independent nurse professional who has experience of the care of older people.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included past reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We spoke with seven people who lived at the service. Not everyone we met who lived at Roseland Care were able to give us their verbal views of the care and support they received due to their health needs. We looked around the premises and observed care practices. We spoke with a visitor and seven staff including the registered manager.

We looked at care documentation for seven people living at the service, medicine records for three people, five staff files, training records and other records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 20 July 2016

This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 21 June 2016. The last inspection took place on 30 July 2015. We found two breaches of the regulations at this inspection. Following the last inspection the provider sent the Care Quality Commission an action plan outlining how they would address the identified breaches.

At the previous inspection we had concerns about how staff cared for people in the Penlee unit. We found some staff did not always provide care in accordance with the guidance in people’s care plans. Information was not always communicated effectively between staff and management and this had led to some staff providing care in an inconsistent manner. Medicines were not always managed and administered safely. Regular medicine audits had not been effective in addressing concerns found at the inspection. Care records were not held securely. Staff had not always received adequate training and supervision support from management. This had led to people living at the Penlee unit being exposed to some risk.

We carried out this inspection to check on the action taken by the service to address the concerns found at the July 2015 inspection.

Roseland Care is a care home which provides care and support for up to 55 predominantly older people. At the time of the inspection there were a total of 35 people living at the service. Some of these people were living with dementia. The service is situated in two separate buildings, Roseland Care and the Penlee Unit. The Penlee unit had four people living there. The service was in the process of moving people from the Penlee unit across to the main Roseland Care building, where a floor of this building was being used to care for people with dementia care needs. The Penlee unit would in future support people with residential care needs.

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.

We walked around the service which was comfortable and personalised to reflect people’s individual tastes. People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect.

We looked at how medicines were managed and administered. We found it was always possible to establish if people had received their medicines as prescribed. Regular medicines audits consistently identifying if errors occurred.

The service had identified the minimum numbers of staff required to meet people’s needs and these were being met. The service had used agency staff to cover shifts on a regular basis however, the service was recruiting for more staff at the time of this inspection to allow for coverage of sickness and holiday leave.

Staff were supported by a system of induction training, supervision and appraisals. Staff knew how to recognise and report the signs of abuse. Staff received training relevant for their role and there were good opportunities for on-going training and support and development. More specialised training specific to the needs of people using the service was being provided, such as dementia care.

Staff meetings were held regularly. These allowed staff to exchange information with the management team and air any concerns or suggestions they had regarding the running of the service.

Meals were appetising and people were offered a choice in line with their dietary requirements and preferences. Where necessary staff monitored what people ate to help ensure they stayed healthy.

Care plans were well organised and contained accurate and up to date information. Care planning was reviewed regularly and people’s changing needs recorded. Where appropriate, relatives were included in the reviews. Care files were held securely in locked cupboards.

Varied activities were provided by two activity co ordinators. People were encouraged to get involved in a planned programme of events. People who either chose to remain in their rooms or were confined to bed due to their healthcare needs were also regularly visited by the activity co ordinators. Films shows, hand bell ringing, quizzes and singing were all provided.

The registered manager was supported by the nursing team, senior carers and a motivated team of care staff. The registered manager also received support from the provider and managers of other services within the group nationally. A clinical lead was due to join the service in early July 2015. This person would support the nursing team and the registered manager.

At this inspection we found the service had taken action to address the concerns found at the July 2015 inspection and had met the requirements of the regulations.