Rosebank Care Home

Rosebank Care Home is a residential care home, without nursing. At the time of our inspection the service was providing personal care to 22 people aged 65 and over, most of whom were living with dementia. The service can support up to 28 people in one adapted building covering two floors.

People's experience of using this service

Staff knew people extremely well which enabled them to respond quickly to people’s needs and wishes at the highest personal level. People were treated as individuals and the service went the extra mile to grant people’s wishes and provide activities and experiences that met their individual needs. This greatly enhanced their well-being and improved their quality of life. People and their relatives spoke very positively about activities and the staff, which evidenced the strong person-centred culture we witnessed in the home.

People and their relatives told us staff were extremely caring and kind. Staff's commitment and knowledge enabled people to receive excellent care from a staff group who knew them well. We observed many instances of kindness and compassion from very caring staff. A relative told us, “Staff are extremely caring here, I cannot fault it. They are welcoming and so friendly.”

The manager and staff strived to provide safe care and support. The team worked with GPs and other healthcare professions to ensure the service responded to people's changing needs safely and effectively. People were supported to maintain good health and to meet their nutritional needs.

The manager continually looked for ways to improve people's lives. Staff culture was positive, and the team was extremely caring. This had resulted in the provision of compassionate and very personalised care. The service had a clear management and staffing structure in place. Staff worked well as a team and had a sense of pride working at the service. The provider had quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service.

People received safe care from skilled and knowledgeable staff. People told us they felt safe receiving care from the service. Staff fully understood their responsibilities to identify and report any concerns. The provider had safe recruitment and selection processes in place.

Risks to people's safety and well-being were managed through a risk management process. There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people's needs and staff responded quickly to support people. Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the procedures in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

The last rating for this service was Outstanding, (published on 10 August 2017.)

Why we inspected:

This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people receive safe, compassionate, high quality care.

Further inspections will be planned for future dates.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service Outstanding.

Why the service is rated Outstanding:

The service continued to provide support in a very caring way. People were supported by an established, motivated and well trained staff team. Staff supported people with kindness and compassion, respected people as individuals and treated them with dignity. People were fully involved in decisions about their care needs and the support they required to meet those needs. Staff knew the people they supported on a personal level and used this knowledge to improve people’s lives.

The service continued to be very responsive to people's needs and ensured people were supported in a personalised way that improved their wellbeing and quality of life. People's changing needs were responded to promptly and effectively, in collaboration with health care professionals. This had a positive impact upon their lives. People had access to a variety of activities that met their individual needs and were tailored to their preferences. The service maintained strong links with the local community where people actively engaged with community choirs, coffee mornings and other events.

The service was led by an experienced and highly committed registered manager who promoted a service that put people at the forefront of all the service did. The atmosphere at the home was warm, friendly and welcoming. There was a very positive and inclusive culture that valued people, relatives and staff and promoted a caring ethos. A strong team culture existed in the home which included all staff, management and the provider, who provided strong support and leadership for the team. The registered manager and staff strived to continually look for ways to improve people’s lives.

People remained safe living in the home. There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs and staff had time to spend with people. Risk assessments were carried out and promoted positive risk taking which enable people to live their lives as they chose. People received their medicines safely.

People continued to receive effective care from staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them and meet their needs. People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the procedures in the service supported this practice. People were supported to access health professionals when needed and staff worked closely with people's G.P's to ensure their health and well-being was monitored.

We looked at three peoples' files which contained person centred care plans and relevant risk assessments. Where risks had been identified, such as a high risk of falls, people were referred for specialist advice and preventative measures had been put in place. Risk assessments had been referenced in the individual care plans to enable staff to clearly identify what care and treatment to provide.

We spoke with three members of staff who said they felt well supported by the service. We saw evidence in staff files of regular training, supervision and appraisal. One care worker said 'I love working here'. Staff kept daily records for each person which detailed how they met people's emotional and psychological needs as well as what activities they had supported people with.

The service sought feedback via an annual satisfaction survey to people, relatives and staff. We saw there was an audit plan in place. We looked at a recent infection control audit which had resulted in an action plan with changes to procedures and equipment.

People we spoke with told us they were happy living in the home and commented that it was 'a great place'. We saw staff interacting with people in a respectful manner and supporting them with moving independently around the home. We saw a wide range of activities and social events on offer, including coffee mornings and library visits in the local community. We observed people actively involved in a memory game during our visit.

Staff we spoke with displayed they had a good understanding of the people that they provided care for. We had minor concerns that the care plans did not contain sufficient detailed information to ensure that personalised care would consistently be delivered. We saw evidence of involvement of a range of healthcare professionals in peoples' care. Healthcare professionals that we spoke with were complimentary about the home. We observed that medication was stored, administered and recorded appropriately.

We had minor concerns regarding the process of obtaining and recording consent from people who use the service and share a double occupancy room. We also had minor concerns that the provider did not have systems in place to identify, assess and manage risks associated with the health and welfare of people who used the service.