Riverdale

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We found improvements had been made following our last inspection to how the people’s needs were assessed. At this assessment, people told us staff understood their needs, we also observed this in staff practice. We found people’s needs had been assessed prior to them using the service and this assessment was ongoing which ensured staff had up to date information on people’s needs and preferences. The management team regularly monitored staff training compliance and ensured regular observations of care took place to check staff were following people’s care plans and risk assessments. We also found when people had been referred to external professionals, the guidance they provided was included in people’s care plans and was known and followed by staff. We received positive feedback from relatives about how their family members outcomes were monitored and had been improved by the care provided at Riverdale and the management team told us about the systems in place to ensure people’s outcomes were monitored and how the provider's electronic system ensured important information could be easily accessed by staff.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People had care plans in place which reflected their individual needs. People felt staff understood their needs. One person told us, “I have not got a big appetite, they [staff] know this”. Relatives felt people received individualised care and support. One relative told us, “They are not rigid and treat the residents with respect, as individuals.” Another relative told us, “They treat mum as a person and with dignity and they listen.”

The management team told us how people's needs were assessed prior to them using the service, and how this continued following their admission to ensure the service had accurate and up to date information on people's needs and preferences.

The provider had a clear policy in place which detailed their admission process. People had their needs assessed prior to them using the service and we found this assessment continued following their admission. We also found Information was being condensed in to 'this is me' profiles which aided staff to know people's life history, key needs and preferences.

We consistently received positive feedback about the meals and food choices available to people. One relative told us, “The food always looks very nice and there is plenty of it. [Person] gets a fried breakfast, a 3-course lunch and something for tea”. Another relative told us, “[Person] loves the food there, it is brilliant and all home cooked.”

Staff had an up to date knowledge of people’s needs. Staff told us about the strategies they used to support people living with dementia and how the training they had received ensured they kept up to date with current best practice.

The management team regularly monitored staff training compliance and ensured regular observations of care took place to check staff were following people’s care plans and risk assessments. We also found when people had been referred to external professionals, the guidance they provided was included in people’s care plans and was known and followed by staff.

Relatives told us the service worked with GP’s and health professionals to meet people’s health needs. One relative told us, “They let me know is [person] see’s the GP and keep me updated.” Another relative told us how the service had acted promptly when their family member had become unwell.

Staff told us about the systems in place to ensure the departments in the service worked together and shared any updates and changes. Staff told us that they received a handover when starting work and they found information on the providers electronic system accessible and up to date.

We found appropriate referrals had been made when staff had identified people required input from external professionals such as dietitians and speech and language therapists. We found the information provided by external professionals was included in people’s care plans and was known by staff.

People told us they felt supported with their health and eating and drinking needs. Relatives confirmed people had regular support to access healthcare and they were updated when any changes were made to people’s planned care. One relative told us, “There is a doctor assigned and they come every few weeks, The carer’s contact me and tell me things that I need to be aware of.” Another relative told us, “[Person] is under nursing care, and see’s a GP. They always keep us updated”.

The management team told us how they ensured people’s needs were regularly monitored. For example, when a person had been identified as losing weight, they had taken several actions to improve this person's outcomes.

We found the GP routinely visited the service, people were encouraged and supported to attend health appointments. The records in place confirmed where required people’s care plans were updated following an appointment and relatives and representatives were informed. We found various tools in place which staff used to monitor people’s health needs, when there had been a change in a person’s health we found the service had acted promptly to ensure the person received additional support as required.

We received positive feedback from relatives about how their family members outcomes were monitored and had been improved by the care provided at Riverdale. One relative told us, “From all reports when [person] first went in, they wouldn’t eat a lot. Now, they eat it in their own time, sometimes having the dessert first. They seem to be eating better and has put a bit of weight on.” Other relatives told us how they had seen improvements in people’s personal care needs since their family members had moved in and received the support from the staff at Riverdale.

The management team told us about the systems in place to ensure people’s outcomes were monitored and how the providers electronic system ensured important information could be easily accessed by staff. The management team also told us about the action plan in place for the service which encapsulated all areas for improvement which had been identified through audits and feedback from people, staff and stakeholders.

There were processes in place for monitoring outcomes for people. Regular reviews of people’s care took place and known risks were monitored. The service operated a clinical governance system which ensured the management and provider had an oversight of people’s clinical needs. We reviewed the records of meetings that had taken place to discuss people’s clinical needs and found them to be informative and provided clear actions to promote positive outcomes for people.

We observed staff to seek consent from people before providing support and administering their medicines. Relatives told us people were treated well and staff understood the importance of providing people with choices on their day to day lives. One relative told us, “They encourage [person]”to get up and participate in activities like skittles. They give choice and encourage.” Another relative told us,” They don’t push these things on [person], so for example, they are allowed to stay in bed if they don’t want to get up.”

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of consent. Staff told us how they applied the training they had received in to their day to day practice. Staff understood that people would sometimes refuse their support and they told us of the actions they would take to ensure the person’s comfort and safety.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS)The service had made appropriate DOLS applications and monitored the progress of the applications. We found Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been completed in line with best practice.