Rosemount Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

The service has been rated requires improvement. We found a breach in relation to governance. The provider had not implemented effective systems to ensure care and treatment was appropriate, met people’s needs and reflected their preferences. However, we found that people were treated with kindness and we observed staff communicating with people and engaging them in activity. .

This service scored 50 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and their relatives told us they felt they were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity in their day-to-day care and support. They told us their privacy and dignity is respected and upheld at all times. However, people and their relatives told us they did not always believe that staff would respond to their needs quickly and efficiently.

Staff and managers told us that they try and listen to and communicate with people in an appropriate way that they can understand. Staff told us they knew and understood people including their preferences, wishes, personal histories, backgrounds and potential. However, some staff told us they observed their colleagues looking disinterested and a lack of effort and that they had witnessed residents having to wait for basic needs such as using the toilet.

Partners did not raise any concerns with us in relation to kindness, compassion & dignity

We observed staff supporting people and did not see any concerns in relation to staff behaviour.

People and their families told us they felt staff treated them as individuals. One family member told us, "Staff know her well and know what she needs."

Care staff told us they treated residents as individuals and understood their preferences and wishes. However, information to support staff to ensure people’s needs and preferences were met was limited. The new manager told us they were in the process of updating residents care plans to ensure they contained more information.

Staff appeared to have a good understanding of people’s needs and understood people as individuals. We observed friendly and appropriate exchanges throughout the inspection.

Processes were not in place to make sure people’s care, support, and treatment met their needs and preferences. Care plans were not individualised, were not fully completed and were not always individualised to the person.

People gave us mixed feedback about the caring nature of the staff. One person told us, “Staff are always nice.” A family member told us, “They come and see if [Family member] is alright and he waves at them”. However, we reviewed individual satisfaction surveys as part of the assessment. One person had answered “No” to the question “My care has made me feel better about my life”. When asked “How do you feel about your care?”, the person had answered “Not happy.” One relative told us, “Some carers are more attentive than others.”

Staff understood people had the right to have choice and control over how their care needs were met. Staff told us how they used non-verbal communication to understand how people were feeling.

During our onsite visits, we observed that people appeared happy with the service and were engaged in activities they were enjoying when we visited.

Decision specific mental capacity assessments for restrictions and information around consent was not always completed or detailed. The new manager was aware of this issue and they explained this would be addressed with the implementation of the new electronic system. Covert administration was taking place in the service, however, guidance from healthcare professionals to support this was not always followed. We also found not all of the legal documents to support this decision could be provided. The new manager took some action towards this by the second day of onsite activity.

People had mixed experience of their immediate needs being met. One family member said, “Staff are responsive, they listen and are not dismissive.” Another family member “Some carers are more attentive than others.” and “He needs two staff to walk him. They did it for a couple of days now it seems to have stopped so he gets no exercise.”

Staff told us they spoke with people and listened to their views to make sure they could meet their immediate needs.

Observations indicated staff had a good understanding of people’s requirements and looked to address their immediate needs. We observed staff engaging well with people responding to their emotional needs.

There was mixed feedback about staff support and opportunities for staff to share feedback, raise concerns, and suggest ways to improve the service. However, staff told us things had improved since the new manager had come into post and they felt there was more support than there had been previously.

Processes to support staff wellbeing had not been fully implemented. Staff had not had appraisals or supervision in line with the homes policy. The new manager had started to work on this and had commenced use of a matrix to plan in supervisions.