Archived: Rosywood Care Services

Updated 17 August 2016

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 visit took place on 30 June 2016. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available to meet with us.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Our expert by experience for this inspection had experience of the needs of people using domiciliary care services.

We looked at information received from local authority commissioners. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services for people and fund the care provided.

We also reviewed the provider’s statement of purpose and the notifications we had been sent. A statement of purpose is a document which includes a standard required set of information about a service. Notifications are changes, events or incidents that providers must tell us about.

We used a variety of methods to inspect the service. We spoke with five people using the service and three relatives. We also spoke with the provider, the care co-ordinator, and three care workers.

We looked at records relating to all aspects of the service including care, staffing and quality assurance. We also looked in detail at four people’s care records.

Updated 17 August 2016

This was an announced inspection that took place on 30 June 2016. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available to meet with us.

Rosywood Care Services is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care to older people and people with disabilities in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 24 people.

The service has a registered manager. This is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.

People using the service and relatives told us the staff were caring, kind and friendly. They said staff were always patient and never rushed people. People mostly had regular staff which gave them the opportunity to get to know them. They said they were involved in decisions about their care and support and staff respected and promoted their privacy and dignity.

The service provided safe care and support. Staff had a good understanding of how to safeguard people from abuse and knew what to do if they had concerns about any of the people using the service.

If people were at risk in any areas of their lives staff were made aware of this. For example, if people needed support to move safely, staff knew what equipment to use, how many staff were needed, and how to safely assist people.

Staff were also made aware of any hazards or risks in people’s homes they visited. Senior staff carried out a ‘house risk assessment’ on the day a package of care commenced so action could be taken as necessary to minimise risk.

People told us there were enough staff employed to work at the service to support them safely. The number of staff people needed for each visit was decided prior to their care commencing and support was delivered in line with this. Staff assisted people with their medicines in the way they wanted, to ensure they received these as prescribed.

Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported and how best to meet their needs. They completed a range of approved training courses and their work was regularly supervised and appraised.

Care records showed that people were routinely asked for their consent and that their choices and decisions were recorded. Staff understood people's right to consent to and decline care. This was in keeping with the Mental Capacity Act.

People told us staff supported them to maintain good health and access to healthcare services if they needed to. One relative told us staff had gone out of their way to care for their family member when they were ill by staying past the end of their shift to care for the person.

The support staff provided was personalised and met people’s needs. Care plans included details of people’s preferences, like and dislikes. People said their care packages were regularly reviewed and updated.

Most people said staff were punctual and if they were delayed they were informed and it was usually for a good reason, for example if a previous call had taken longer due to a person being ill.

People knew how to make a complaint if they needed to and if they raised issues they had a positive response from the service with improvements made as a result.

People were satisfied with the quality of the service and said they would recommend it to others. They were involved in how the service was run through care and quality reviews. They gave us examples of improvements that had been made as a result of their comments.

The provider had a system in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service. Records showed the provider had worked to a series of action plans to make ongoing improvements to the service.