Riversdale Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last inspection we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.  

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. One person said, “Yes I feel listened to.” Some people told us they felt they received excellent and individualised care and support. One relative told us, “Riversdale is a very special home with amazing staff. They work hard and look after the residents so well. Many activities and social occasions take place for the residents and their families to enjoy.” All the care plans we reviewed reflected the person’s character and mentioned what is important to them. Staff clearly knew people well and celebrated their achievements. One staff member told us, “I always ensure the care provided is to the residents needs and wishes.”  

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The feedback we received from partner agencies was positive. People were being supported to attend health or social care appointments. We saw an example where staff supported a person to continue to engage in an activity with a community provider.   

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information was made available to people in formats they could understand, and we saw an example of a person being supported with technology to communicate, which met their needs. However, one relative told us they felt that communication from staff was poor. We fed this back to the provider.

The provider told us they encouraged people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Surveys were sent out monthly to people, relatives, partner agencies and staff inviting them to provide feedback and suggestions for improvement. We saw examples of action being taken based on the feedback received from the surveys. People told us they felt listened to and involved in their care. Feedback from relatives was mixed. One relative told us, “I am able to speak with all the staff regularly.” Another commented, “My relative is always encouraged and supported to be involved.” One relative told us communication is poor at Riversdale Nursing Home. We observed people being listened to and being in control of their support. However, one person told us they did not feel they were being listened to about the support they would like to receive.  We brought this to the attention of the provider.

The provider did not always make sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. We saw an example of a person being supported quickly at the point of need. Some people told us they felt able to access care and support at the point of need, however, others told us they would like more support then was being given to them. 

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this. While some individuals expressed confidence, they would obtain care and support as needed, others indicated a need for more assistance than what was currently being provided. External partners told us the provider listened to their requests and was responsive. 

The provider supported people to plan for important life changes, so they had enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. We saw examples where the provider discussed people’s future wishes and focused on providing comprehensive support to individuals nearing the end of their lives. This included medical, emotional and spiritual support to ensure people’s comfort and dignity.