We carried out a review of the data available to us about Rykneld View on 6 July 2023. 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 Rykneld View, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ There were clear signs at the entrance to identify the home was closed to routine visitors.
¿ There was a sign-in book and temperature check for visiting healthcare professionals and personal protective equipment (PPE) was available in reception.
¿ Staff checked in at reception and then had a dedicated room for COVID-19 testing and for applying PPE. Staff had breaks at intervals to maintain social distancing.
¿ Staff had trolleys available in corridors for fresh equipment, PPE and cleaning materials. People’s rooms had clinical bins for the disposal of used PPE in order to minimise the risk of cross infection.
¿ Prior to the outbreak, staff and people living at the service were on a testing regime to identify the signs of COVID-19.
¿ There were signs around the service to help staff identify COVID-19 symptoms, handwashing procedures and PPE guidance to ensure current guidance was followed.
¿ During the outbreak people were isolated in their rooms and staff were allocated to work in certain areas to support the same people as much as possible.
¿ A large number of staff were affected by COVID-19 so agency staff were used for a few weeks to maintain staffing levels and other external agencies offered support to the service.
¿ The service had large communal spaces and garden areas. The manager told us they were making plans for families to visit using screens and the garden space as soon as possible.
¿ People were kept in touch with families using social media and phone calls. The service shared a newsletter with families about events at the service.
¿ Domestic staff had cleaning schedules in place and were performing additional cleaning of frequent touch areas. Laundry facilities were well organised to prevent cross infection.
¿ Staff had received training in infection control, use of PPE, handwashing and COVID-19 to ensure they were up to date with current guidance.
¿ The manager told us that staff at the service had worked together to support people during the outbreak and the support from other agencies had been amazing during a very difficult time.
The inspection took place on 5 and 6 April 2018. The first day of the inspection was unannounced.
At our last inspection in February 2016, we rated the service 'Good'. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of 'Good.' This inspection report is written in shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
A registered manager was 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People's risk assessments provided staff with information on how to support people safely, though some assessments were not fully in place. Lessons to prevent incidents occurring had been learnt from past events. Staffing levels meant people were safe but they were not always sufficient to ensure meet people’s personal care needs.
Staff had been trained in safeguarding (protecting people from abuse) and understood their responsibilities in this area. Staff were subject to checks to ensure they were appropriate to work with the people who used the service though systems needed to be more robust to provide full protection. People were protected from the risks of infection.
People using the service and relatives we spoke with said they thought the home was safe. They thought their medicines were given safely and this had been the case when we checked.
Staff had been trained to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs. Staff understood their main responsibility under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to allow, as much as possible, people to have an effective choice about how they lived their lives.
People had plenty to eat and drink and they told us they liked the food served. People's health care needs had been protected.
People told us they liked the staff and got on well with them. We saw many examples of staff working with people in a friendly and caring way. People and their representatives were involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
Care plans were individual to the people using the service and covered their health and social care needs. Activities were organised to provide stimulation for people and they had opportunities to take part in a number of activities, though not in the community.
People and their relatives told us they would tell staff or management if they had any concerns and were confident these would be followed up.
People and staff we spoke with were satisfied with how the home was run by the registered manager. Management carried out audits and checks to ensure the home was running properly to meet people's needs.
This inspection took place on 7 January and was unannounced. We returned on 12 January which was announced.
Rykneld View is registered to provide care for up to 31 adults. They provide general residential and nursing care and do not admit people with a primary diagnosis of dementia or challenging behaviour. At the time of our inspection there were 19 people living at the service.
Accommodation is provided over two floors. There are stairs and a lift available to the first floor.
Rykneld View has 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.
People living at the service told us they felt safe, and that they were happy living there. Staff had a good understanding of how to safeguard people and protect them from abuse. Staff were confident about what action they would take if they had any concerns, which included reporting concerns to the registered manager as well as external agencies such as the local authority or the Care Quality Commission.
People were protected by safe staff recruitment procedures. There were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff to meet people’s needs. Staff had received training which reflected the needs of the people living at the service and enabled them to provide support in a safe manner. We saw risk assessments in place in people’s plans of care to promote their safety.
We saw that people received their medication in a timely and safe manner, administered by staff who were trained in the administration of medication.
People were offered choices with food and drinks and appropriate support was given when needed. There were drinks and snacks available between meals.
The registered manager and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), and supported people in line with these principles. This included staff seeking consent from people before delivering care. We saw that appropriate referrals had been made to the local authority when people had been assessed as being deprived of their liberty.
People’s health and welfare was promoted and they were referred to relevant healthcare professionals in a timely manner. We saw that appropriate action and advice was taken to meet people’s health needs.
People’s plans of care were individualised and accurately reflected people’s care and support needs.
The plans of care contained information about people’s life histories, interests and likes and dislikes which provided staff with sufficient information to enable them to provide care effectively.
The service had an atmosphere which was warm, friendly and supportive. We saw staff positively engaging with people living at the service and treating people with dignity and respect.
The provider had systems in place to monitor the service. Audits and checks were effectively used to ensure people’s safety and the building and equipment were well maintained.
The registered manager provided effective leadership to the service and sought regular feedback from people living at the service, their relatives and staff. They encouraged staff to attend meetings to share their views in order for them to review and develop the service. People were complimentary about the registered manager and felt they were supportive and approachable.
We spoke with three people visiting their relatives to identify if they had any concerns regarding the recent changes. Visitors did not feel that there had been an impact on the care people received but said they were unsure who the new manager was. This reflected the information we had received from visitors prior to our visit, who also told us they were unsure who was in charge of the home. One visitor told us, 'I am a bit worried about all the changes, I had a good relationship with the old manager, I don't know the new manager at all, it all seemed to happen so quickly.'
We looked at two people's care records and found that these records had been reviewed regarding the person's support needs and how any identified risks were to be managed.
People that were able to give us their opinion confirmed that staff supported them appropriately.