Archived: Rose House

This is the first inspection of Rose House which was registered with the Care Quality Commission in February 2014. Rose House provides a service for one person. Therefore this report will not provide any personal or intimate details in relation to the persons care in order to protect the person's confidential information. Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with the person who used the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records. If you want to see the evidence to support our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We saw staff communicated and responded to the person who used the service with respect.

People were cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic.

Care plans were individualised and contained information which directed and informed staff and enabled them to provide appropriate care and support. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people living at the home and a member of the management team was available on call in case of emergencies.

Systems were in place to make sure managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints and concerns. This reduced possible risks for the person and helped to continually improve the service.

Spectrum had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We saw that they were using these protections appropriately.

Staff knew about risk management plans and showed us examples where they had followed them. This meant the person was not put at unnecessary risk, but also had access to choice and remained in control of decisions about their care and lives.

The registered manager set the staff rotas and took the person's care needs into account when making decisions about the numbers of staff required and their qualifications, skills and experience. This helped to ensure the person's needs were met. The registered manager agreed to review the length of shifts at the home as some staff were at the home for lengthy periods of time, for example 48 hours. This may not have been beneficial to the person, and the staff member could become tired and less effective in their work.

We found Rose House was a safe service.

Is the service effective?

The person's health and care needs was assessed with them, and their care plan discussed with them. We saw the care plan was up to date and accurately reflected their current needs. There were good arrangements in place to gain consent from the person in relation to the care they received.

The person's preferences, interests, aspirations and different needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with their wishes.

We saw the care plan had been reviewed regularly.

We found Rose House was an effective service.

Is the service caring?

We saw the person was treated with respect and dignity by staff. We saw staff showed, through their actions, conversations and during discussions with us, empathy and understanding towards the person they cared for.

The person's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with their wishes.

We found Rose House was a caring service.

Is the service responsive?

We found that the person who used the service was involved in making day to day decisions. During the inspection we noted that the person was given choices in how they wanted to occupy their time, this meant they had opportunities to pursue their interests.

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received care in a coherent way.

We found Rose House was a responsive service.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a quality assurance system, and records showed problems and opportunities to change things for the better were addressed. As a result the quality of the service was continuously improving. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.

We saw minutes of regular meetings held with the staff and management team. This showed the management consulted with staff regularly to gain their views and experiences and improve support for people who lived at the service.

Staff told us they were offered relevant and useful training on a regular basis. Staff also told us they felt supported by the registered manager and could approach them at any time if they had a concern.

We found Rose House was a well-led service.