This was an unannounced inspection that took place on 29th May 2015.
Rosehill House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 23 people. It is a listed Georgian property set in its own grounds near to Whitehaven. Accommodation is provided in five double and 13 single rooms, all with en-suites. Communal rooms are situated on the ground floor of the home. The home does not have a dining room.
The provider is also the registered manager. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Staff in the home were aware of their responsibilities in keeping vulnerable people free from harm and abuse.
The provider ensured that she completed risk assessments and managed any risks to individuals.
Staffing levels were suitable and people said the team were able to meet their needs.
Staff were recruited in a safe way.
There were suitable arrangements in place if there were any staffing matters of a disciplinary nature.
Medicines were managed correctly.
We saw that people were asked their consent and that the staff were aware of individual rights. No one was being deprived of their liberty.
Staff were given suitable induction, training, supervision and appraisal.
People told us they were satisfied with the food provided.
We saw that there had been some improvements to the environment and the provider agreed to our recommendation to purchase some small dining tables.
We looked at care plans and found that these were detailed and up to date and based on sound assessments. People were involved and aware of their own plans.
People told us they were satisfied with the range of activities and outings on offer. Regular church services were held in the home.
We spoke to people on the day who felt comfortable making complaints both informally and formally. We had some contact after the inspection with people who did not feel able to complain directly. We recommended that the provider look at the arrangements in place for people and their families to make complaints in a safe way.
The registered provider was suitably trained and experienced. There was a newly appointed deputy who would support her in the role. The senior care team were aware of their responsibilities as shift leaders. Staff knew how the home was managed and were comfortable with the arrangements in place.
The provider promoted a culture of openness and transparency where the focus was on the needs of people in the home. Staff felt that they could question decisions and their views were taken into account. People in the home were consulted and told us their wishes were respected.
Consultation with people in the home and their relatives was part of the quality assurance system. We saw evidence to show that there were regular quality audits of all aspects of the service. Changes had been made as a result of monitoring quality.
Partnership working with health colleagues had improved and new ways of communication had been developed.