Roland Residential Care Homes - 6 Compton Road

Updated 15 March 2019

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 1 November 2018 at the home and was unannounced. On 9 November 2018 we contacted relatives by phone to obtain their feedback. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection we looked at information that we had received about the service and formal notifications that the service had sent to the CQC. We also looked at safeguarding notifications that the provider had sent to us. Providers are required by law to inform CQC of any safeguarding issues within their service.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with five staff including the registered manager and four care staff. We also spoke with three people living at the home. We looked at three care records and risk assessments, six people’s medicine records, four staff files, and other paperwork related to the management of the service including staff training, quality assurance and rota systems. Following the inspection, we spoke with two relatives.

Updated 15 March 2019

Roland Residential Care Homes – 6 Compton Road 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. The home is a terraced house over two floors that accommodates up to seven people. At the time of the inspection there were six people living at the home. This inspection took place on the 1 and 9 November 2018.

At our last inspection we rated the service 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’s personal risks had been assessed and clear guidance provided to staff to enable them to minimise the known risks. There was a clear focus on mental health risk assessments and information on how to maintain mental health well-being.

People received their medicines safely and on time. People received yearly medicines reviews and there were systems in place to audit medicines.

Staff had received training in safeguarding which was refreshed each year. Staff were able to explain different types of abuse and understood how to report any concerns. Staff were safely recruited.

The home had taken steps to ensure that people were protected from the risk of infection.

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.

People were supported to have choice around food and had easy access to drinks. Menus were planned weekly in consultation with people.

We observed warm and friendly interactions between staff and people. Staff knew people well and there was a warm, pleasant atmosphere within the home.

Staff understood how to treat people with dignity and respect and we observed this throughout the inspection.

Care plans were person centred and documented what was important to people and how they wanted their care to be delivered.

The home took time to find out each person’s interest and assisted them to take part in them. There were also in-house activities that people could choose to take part in. People, where appropriate, were supported to access the community.

People’s views on how the home was run was taken into account and people attended residents’ meetings to voice their opinion.

There was a complaints procedure that people and relatives were aware of.

There was good oversight of the home by the registered manager. There were a number of quality assurance audits that helped identify any areas that needed to be addressed, and we saw lessons were learnt from accidents and incidents.

People, relative and staff were positive about the registered manager. The registered manager was visible around the home and people appeared comfortable talking to him.

The home worked in partnership with other healthcare professionals to ensure that people’s individual well-being was supported.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.