The Rowans

We assessed 8 quality statements in the safe key question and found areas of good practice and minor areas of concern. These concerns had not impacted people’s health and safety. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. People were provided with safe care and support. Safeguarding concerns were investigated and acted on. Relevant agencies were notified when an incident had occurred. We did note two incidents had not been reported to the CQC. Action was taken to address this. Staff assessed and reviewed safety risks to people and made sure people, and those important to them participated in making decisions about how they wished to be supported to stay safe. There was an occasion where guidance provided from a health professional had not been updated in the person’s care records. Staff received relevant training to meet the range of people’s needs at the service. Staff received support through supervision and appraisal to support their continuous learning and improve their working practice. Managers checked the suitability of staff to ensure they were suitable and fit to provide care. People’s medicines were managed well, although we did have concerns that controlled drugs were not recorded appropriately. The home was clean and tidy. We found minor infection control concerns. Staff understood how to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

People received care in accordance with their assessed needs. Care records and risk assessments were amended when people’s needs changed. This ensured people continued to receive care that met their needs. People’s care was provided with their other relevant person’s consent. Two people who had been assessed as having epilepsy did not have detailed care plans and risk assessments in place. However, staff could explain how they would care for the person.

People received care and support that promoted and encouraged their independence. People had control over how their care was provided and were included in decisions relating to their care. This included if any changes to care were needed. Staff provided care in a dignified and caring way. When people needed support from staff, they responded quickly. Staff spoke positively about their roles. They enjoyed caring for and supporting people and they had a clear focus on improving people’s lives. We found minor concerns relating to inappropriate terms being used to describe a person’s behaviour in their care record.

People had access to external health and social care agencies and professionals as and when they needed them.

The registered manager was currently working at the service and an interim manager was in place. Whilst well-meaning and keen to learn, the manager was inexperienced and did not yet have the required qualifications for the role. They were being supported by the provider to obtain those qualifications and to manage the home. Auditing processes, where, overall, effective, but they had not identified the issues we raised during this inspection. However, people’s health and safety had not been impacted. Staff performance was robustly monitored. Work was needed to ensure staff were informed of and worked towards the provider’s aims, values, and strategy. Staff felt able to speak up and raise any concerns. They felt able to do so without fear of recrimination. The registered manager had an ‘open-door’ policy that welcomed feedback from staff.