Roop Cottage Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

This key question has been rated good. The service was responsive to people's needs.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We received mixed feedback about person-centered care. We received several comments from people and relatives there were not a lot of opportunities to take part in meaningful activities in and outside of the home.

Staff were able to describe what person-centered care was. Comments included, “We focus on the person, know all their habits and care is provided to their needs only. Every individual is different." Staff said people’s care was tailored to their needs and wishes. Staff said people have some activities and they are always happy when they are doing any activities. Activities includes dancing, singing, and chatting. The manager told us work was ongoing to ensure improvements in care plans fully reflected people's personal wishes and preferences.

We observed people received person-centered care and support and staff understood people's individual needs and preferences well. People looked smart and well-groomed and were wearing clothing of their choice. We observed staff offering choices and consulting with people in their preferred communication style. People's bedrooms were individualized and people had personal possessions around them if they wished. We saw one person liked to have a baby doll with them and staff took time to engage with the person and include the baby doll in conversations. Over the course of the assessment we did not observe a wide range of meaningful activities being available to people, although the manager told us there were plans to address and improve this.

People and relatives did not raise any concerns about continuity of their care or receiving the support they required.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's care needs and continuity of care.

Partners reported they had seen recent improvements at the service. Progress in relation to the shortfalls identified in people's care records had not always been timely and there had been repeated issues identified. However, they reported a recent improving picture with overall compliance and improved collaborative working.

Processes were in place to ensure people received choice and continuity of care when accessing other services.

We did not receive any feedback from people about accessible information. Relatives described recent improvements, including being able to attend meetings remotely which they said was helpful.

The provider told us they had a range of formats they could produce information in, including large print and symbols. This included the Statement of Purpose and the service user guide. They told us there were plans to have more accessible noticeboards in the home to support people's understanding and involvement.

Processes were in place to listen and involve people. Meetings were regularly held with people and relatives. We saw evidence of recent surveys being carried out with people, relatives and staff and their feedback had been translated into a "You said: We did" format which clearly showed what action had been taken and what was planned. The complaints policy and process was displayed and a summary log maintained including details of action taken. There had also been specific meetings held to discuss key topics such as activities and meal quality and choice. The manager was involving people and relatives in reviewing their care plans but this was not always consistently recorded.

We received mixed feedback from people and relatives about how well they felt listened to.

The provider told us there were processes in place to get people's feedback including meetings and surveys and there was clear guidance if people wished to raise a complaint or concern.

Processes were in place to listen and involve people. Meetings were regularly held with relatives and people living at the home.

People and relatives did not raise any concerns about equity in access.

The manager told us people were able to access services equitably. The manager had recently introduced 'Resident of the Day' which provided people with opportunities to review their recent care and support. They were working alongside partners to improve how people were able to access more specialist support and facilities as part of their care.

Overall feedback was partners had seen recent improvements at the service.

Processes were in place to support equity in access. People were able to access care and support when they needed it. Both floors had accessible communal spaces and there was a well maintained lift to the first floor. The garden space was accessible and safe.

We did not ask people and relatives about this subject. The provider carried out regular surveys with people and relatives and there were no concerns raised.

Staff told us they listened to people's views and wishes. The manager told us they were carrying out detailed reviews for the people who lived at the home. They acknowledged some people had not had a great deal of access to specialist support in the community. They told us they were working directly with social workers and commissioners to address this to ensure people's care was fully tailored to their needs.

Processes were in place to support equity in people's experiences and outcomes. For example, care records showed the manager had recently proactively accessed specialist advice to identify improvements to the equipment they needed.

We did not talk to people and their relatives about planning for the future or end of life care. We did not receive any other feedback on this topic.

Staff knew how to support people who were receiving end of life care. Staff said “We will do what they want, some want to have their families around them so they will invite the families to come around. Staff said they will ensure people have pain free care during the end of their lives." Another staff member said, “We support them based on their wishes, we give them pain free care, we reach out to their family members, we make them comfortable. Information is provided in their care plan”. People’s end of life wishes and arrangements were not recorded in their care plans. The manager said they would address this.

The manager confirmed there was no one who was currently approaching the end of their life. ReSPECT forms were in place and clearly highlighted on the electronic care planning system. However, people's end of life arrangements and wishes were not recorded in the care plans. The manager recognised this was an area that needed to be addressed.