We carried out a review of the data available to us about Rosedale Nursing Home 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 Rosedale Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Rosedale Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation for persons who require nursing and/or personal care. It is divided into three units; a general nursing unit; a unit for people living with dementia who require residential care and a unit for people living with dementia who require nursing care. The home is registered to accommodate up to 68 people across three separate units. The residential unit was empty at the time of our inspection and to be used as the designated care setting for 13 people.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ The systems in place allowed people to be admitted to the home safely. The unit was a separate building with its own entrance and exit which allowed direct access for staff and ambulance admissions. This reduced the risk of cross infection. There was no movement of staff or residents between units.
¿ People who would be isolating at the unit had their own dedicated staff to meet all of their support needs.
¿ National guidance was followed on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). There was clear signage on the correct use of PPE and handwashing techniques and staff had received appropriate infection control and prevention training.
¿ All non-essential visits into the home had been suspended at the time of the inspection so alternative measures such as video calls were planned to be used to maintain contact with family members.
¿ The environment was very clean. Additional cleaning was scheduled to take place of frequently touched surfaces such as light switches and door handles.
¿ There were detailed risk assessments to manage and minimise the risks Covid-19 presented to people who used the service, staff and visitors.
¿ Staff had been consulted with about their specific risks or concerns and the provider was taking all possible steps to keep them and people using the service safe.
We were assured that this service met good infection prevention and control guidelines as a designated care setting.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Rosedale Nursing 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.
Rosedale Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation for persons who require nursing and/or personal care. It is divided into three units; a general nursing unit; a unit for people living with dementia who require residential care and a unit for people living with dementia who require nursing care. There were 41 people living at Rosedale on the day we inspected.
There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
At the last inspection, the service was rated good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.
People were protected from the risk of abuse and staff followed the local safeguarding procedures when they suspected abuse.
Risk assessments were completed to reduce the risk of harm. Accidents or incidents were analysed to reduce the risk of reoccurrence.
People's medicines were stored and administered safely. Staff were aware of the infection control measures in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.
There were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff to meet the needs of people safely.
Recruitment procedures were robust to ensure staff were fit and of good character to work with people.
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.
There were positive interactions between people and staff. Staff knew people well, showed kindness, dignity and respect. Care was person centred and people were provided with choice.
The provider had a system in place for responding to people's concerns and complaints. People were regularly asked for their views. There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection was unannounced and was carried out on 16 October 2015.
Rosedale Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care, treatment of disease disorder or injury and diagnostic and screening for up to 68 people. It is divided into three units; a general nursing unit; a unit for people living with dementia who required residential care and a unit for people living with dementia who require nursing care. There were 61 people living at Rosedale on the day we inspected.
There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 registered manager had also completed a Provider Information Return (PIR).The PIR 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.
Rosedale provided good care and support for the people that lived there. People we spoke with said they felt safe and they spoke positively about the care and support they received. Staff recruitment processes included carrying out appropriate checks to reduce the risk of employing unsuitable people.
The home had safe systems in place to ensure people received their medication as prescribed; this included regular auditing by the home and the dispensing pharmacist. Staff were assessed for competency prior to administering medication and this was reassessed regularly.
New staff had received relevant training which was targeted and focussed on improving outcomes for people who used the service. This helped to ensure that the staff team had a good balance of skills, knowledge and experience to meet the needs of people who used the service.
Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure that people’s rights were protected where they were unable to make decisions.
People had their nutritional needs met. People were offered a varied diet and were provided with sufficient drinks and snacks. People who required special diets were catered for.
People had good access to health care services and the service was committed to working in partnership with healthcare professionals.
People told us that they were well cared for and happy with the support they received. We found staff approached people in a caring manner and people’s privacy and dignity was respected.
People looked well cared for and appeared at ease with staff. The home had a relaxed and comfortable atmosphere.
People were involved in activities they liked and were linked to previous life experience, interests and hobbies. Visitors were made welcome to the home and people were supported to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives.
People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy and all the people we spoke with told us that they felt that they could talk with any of the staff if they had a concern or were worried about anything.
The provider actively sought the views of people using and visiting the service. They were asked to complete an annual survey to provide feedback on the service.This enabled the provider to address any shortfalls and improve the service.
The service had a quality assurance system, and records showed that identified problems and opportunities to change things for the better had been addressed promptly. As a result we could see that the quality of the service was continuously improving.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and the quality assurance systems in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service. They told us the manager was supportive and promoted positive team working.
We saw that people had choice of a balanced and nutritious diet. Staff monitored people's weight and recorded food and fluid intake of people who they had identified of being at risk of dehydration or malnutrition and took appropriate action promptly. People told us the food was 'lovely'. Another 'The food is good, school dinners but much better".
People told us they felt safe and trusted the staff who were caring for them. We saw that appropriate action was taken by the home to safeguard people.
We saw that peoples medication was administered properly and audits were carried out to make sure that the systems were in place so that people received their prescribed medication safely.
Audits had been carried out in areas such as care documentation, accidents that had occurred in the home and the dependency levels of the client group. We saw that effective systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.
Previously we had also raised concerns about how people were being cared for. We saw at this inspection that people's identified care needs were being met and people were receiving appropriate planned care. We saw that safeguards were in place to protect people from risk of harm and identified safe guarding issues were being reported and managed properly.
Improvements had been made to the environment and this work was ongoing and near completion.
During the inspection we spoke to some people who live at the home. They told us that they liked living there and the staff were kind and caring towards them. One person said 'It's fine, I like it '.
Most of the inspection was carried out in 'The Lodge' which is a separate building to the main part of the home. We found that the environment in The Lodge was dirty and some communal areas and bedrooms smelt of urine. Some furniture in people's bedrooms was broken and one person's bedroom was cold. This meant that people were not cared for in a pleasant and comfortable environment.
We found the medication systems in place at the home were in disarray and people were being placed at unnecessary risk of harm because of this. Some people's medication had not been ordered in a timely manner, resulting in them not receiving their prescribed tablets. One person had been without some of their medicine for 12 consecutive days. We have asked the provider to take urgent action regarding how people's medication is managed at the home to ensure that people are kept safe and their health is protected.
Most people felt that they were able to make choices and decisions in most aspects of daily living. People looked well cared for and we observed positive rapport between those living and working at the home.
We spoke with people living at the home who said 'I had steak pie for my lunch, it was very nice. We had a dance yesterday afternoon, it was good. We sit outside when it's sunny.'
'The staff treat me well here. I can choose when I want to have a bath or shower. I am well looked after.'
'I have been here quite a while, there is not enough to do but I enjoy the food as it's excellent. I get a paper every day. I like to lie on my bed and watch TV.
The people we spoke with were positive about the staff. One of them commented 'All of the staff treat me well here; I can't speak highly enough of them.'
People said that they felt safe and knew how to make a complaint or raise any concerns.
We spent most of our time on the Hollies and Rosedale. During our visit where we were unable to speak with people we observed how they interacted with the staff in the home and talked to the relatives and friends who visited them.
People told us they were generally satisfied with the care and support they receive at Rosedale Nursing Home. People also said that they felt their privacy and dignity had been respected and maintained by staff. They told us most of the staff are 'good' and staff are 'lovely'.
We were able to observe staff treating people respectfully. People were seen to be comfortable to approach staff to make their needs known.
Relatives told us they were generally kept informed about their relatives and where appropriate they had been involved in decisions relating to their care or treatment.
On Rosedale people told us it was 'okay' and implied their care and welfare needs were generally met. However they also commented there was 'never enough staff'.