The Leys Residential Home is a care home that provides personal care for up to 20 people. At the time of our inspection 18 people lived there. There was a registered manager who provided good leadership and supported the staff. During our inspection the registered manager took time to check that staff were alright and that people's needs were met.
We spoke with five people who lived at the home and two family members who visited on the day. We also spent time observing the care and support that people received to meet their different needs over the course of the day.
At this inspection we looked at the communal areas of the home which included the toilets, bathrooms, dining and lounge areas and on invitation from some people, their rooms.
The registered manager, deputy manager and three members of staff who told us about people's care and life at the home spent some time with us during the day.
We also looked at the care records of two people who lived at the home and various management records. These records were used to review, monitor and record the improvements made to the quality of care and support that people received.
We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask:
' Is the service safe?
' Is the service effective?
' Is the service caring?
' Is the service responsive?
' Is the service well led?
This is a summary of what we found.
Is the service safe?
People who lived at the home and their relatives told us that they felt safe and staff responded to their needs with minimum delays. One person told us: 'When I need them (the staff) they are there." A family we spoke with was complimentary about the care and support provided and felt that staff at the home kept their relative safe.
There was a focus on people's safety and we saw that staff assessed, identified and had taken action to reduce risks so that people were protected from harm.
We saw that staff practices reduced the risks to people from the spread and or outbreak of infections. We saw that people lived in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic.
CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. At the time of our inspection the registered manager was considering an application that may need to be made. This showed that the registered manager was aware when levels of intervention or supervision may represent a deprivation of a person's liberty. During our inspection we did not observe people being potentially restricted or their liberty being deprived by staff practices.
Following our last inspection in December 2013 we saw that improvements had been made to staff recruitment procedures that ensured people were protected from harm.
Is the service effective?
Each person had a range of care plans in place that provided information about how people preferred their care and support. The plans also included information about people's health needs and interests. Staff were able to tell us about the support and care people needed to effectively meet their individual needs which matched the information in the care plans that we looked at.
People that we spoke with were able to provide examples of care and support to meet changes in their needs or when they needed some assistance due to being unwell and or had accidentally fell. One person told us, 'They (the staff) really look after me" and "If I need a doctor one would be sent for, I have no worries about that." This showed that people's needs were effectively met in the right way and at the right time.
Is the service caring?
The atmosphere at the home was relaxed and we saw interactions between staff and people were attentive and respectful. The people we talked with told us that they had no concerns about how staff treated them. One person told us, 'I am happy here and they (the staff) are all good to me."
During our inspection staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible and to make their own decisions. One member of staff told us, 'How we care for these residents is paramount. We have a good understanding of their needs and promote their independence and respect what they would like to do.'
We saw that staff showed they cared as they treated people with respect and dignity when they supported people when they were anxious or unsettled.
Is the service responsive?
Staff worked in partnership with other professionals that supported people to receive appropriate care, treatment and support to meet their different health and social care needs.
The registered manager and staff were aware of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how to involve people in the decision making process if a person who lived at the home lacked the mental capacity to make a decision. We saw staff demonstrated their understanding of people's behaviour when they patiently explained options to a person and gained their understanding and consent.
During our inspection we saw that there was evidence of unplanned engagements with people and staff chatting to each other as time allowed. We also saw people had opportunities of having their nails painted. The manager was reviewing activities. This included the available time staff had for the unplanned engagements with people to ensure that these continued to be improved to promote people's wellbeing.
People told us that staff listened to their views and supported them to keep in touch with people who were important to them by way of visits.
Is the service well led?
There was evidence that the registered manager provided strong and inclusive leadership.
Staff we spoke with told us that the registered manager was approachable so that staff could express any concerns or issues they had.
People who lived at the home and family members were supported and encouraged to share both their positive experiences and areas that required improvements.
There was evidence that the registered manager acted on feedback received and made changes to practices that ensured improvements were made.