Redesdale Court

There was a learning culture at the home; accidents and incidents were monitored at location and provider level so any lessons learned could be shared across all services. There had been a reduction in the number of falls. The registered manager had been working with one of the provider’s specialist nurses on falls management and reduction.

4 of the 13 people and relatives we spoke with told us that some people who were living with dementia, came into people’s rooms or displayed distressed behaviours which upset people. Management staff explained they were keeping people’s individual needs under review in each of the ‘communities’ to ensure people were supported in the most appropriate ‘community.’ Other people and relatives said that people were safe.

There was a system in place to assess, monitor and manage risk. People were cared for in a clean and well-maintained home. The design and décor met people’s needs.

There was a system in place to ensure staff were skilled, trained and supported. Sufficient staff were deployed at the time of our assessment to meet people’s needs. Medicines were managed safely.

An electronic care management system was used to assess people’s needs. Most people and relatives told us they were involved in the assessment process. Staff knew people’s needs and could describe these to us.

People’s nutritional needs were met. Most people and relatives spoke positively about the meals. Consent was gained prior to staff providing care and support. People were supported to live healthier lives.

People were treated with kindness and respect. Most people spoke positively about the caring nature of staff. Comments included, “I like them they are genuine” and “They do it [care] with a happy heart.” We observed positive interactions between staff and people. People told us and our observations confirmed that people were supported to carry out daily living skills such as housekeeping to maintain their independence and promote feelings of self-worth.

There was a planned activities programme in place. There was mixed feedback around activities provision. We received several comments that activities could be improved. Other people told us there was enough going on to occupy their attention.

Most people told us that staff were responsive to their needs. We received a concern regarding how relationships were facilitated within the home and visiting arrangements which we passed to management staff to review.

We observed person-centred interactions between staff and people. Staff knew people well and could describe how they provided individualised care to people.

Whilst records were available to evidence how formal complaints were managed and monitored, it was not always clear how informal concerns were dealt with and monitored for any trends or themes.

A quality monitoring system was in place to review all aspects of the service. There was a positive culture at the home. Staff spoke highly of the support they received form the management team.

A diverse staff team worked at the home. All staff were supported to ensure they experienced positive outcomes.