Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount Care Home

Updated 5 May 2021

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.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 7 April 2021 and was announced.

Updated 5 May 2021

Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount Care Home provides residential care for up to 29 people with a range of health and support needs, including people living with a learning disability, dementia or frailty of old age. At the time of our inspection, 27 people were living at the home. Keychange Charity Rosemary Mount is situated in East Worthing close to transport links. All rooms are of single occupancy and accommodation is over two floors, accessible by a lift and stairs. Communal areas include a large entrance hall, sitting room, dining room and a further smaller sitting room where people can receive visitors in privacy. People have access to gardens at the rear of the home.

At our last inspection we rated the service as ‘Good’ overall. We rated the key question of ‘Safe’ as ‘Requires Improvement’ because of concerns relating to the administration of medicines. At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made and this key question has improved to ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of ‘Good’ and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. Staff had been trained to recognise the signs of potential abuse and know what action to take if they suspected abuse had occurred. People’s risks were identified, assessed and managed safely. Staffing levels were assessed based on people’s care and support needs. New staff were recruited safely. Medicines were managed safely. If things went wrong, lessons were learned and improvements made. The home was clean, tidy and smelled fresh.

People received effective care from staff who had completed relevant training and received regular supervisions and annual appraisals. People had a choice of what they wanted to eat and drinks were freely available. A range of healthcare professionals and services were available to support people with their health needs. 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.

Positive, caring relationships had been developed between people and staff. People were positive about the care and complimentary about the staff who supported them. People were encouraged to be involved in decisions relating to their care. They were treated with dignity and respect.

Care was planned in a personalised way to meet people’s support needs, likes and dislikes. Activities were organised based on people’s interests and what they would like to do. Outings were organised which people enjoyed, in addition to activities provided in-house. People knew how to make a complaint and who to speak with. No complaints had been recorded in the last year. If they wished, and if their care needs could be met, people could live out their lives at the home.

The home was well led and staff felt supported by the management team. People and a relative were asked for their feedback about the service and any improvements identified were acted upon. A system of audits had been implemented which was robust and drove continual improvement.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.