The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors and a representative from the local authority safeguarding team. 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 caring?
' Is the service responsive?
' Is the service safe?
' Is the service effective?
' Is the service well led?
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service and the staff supporting them, and from looking at records.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
' Is the service caring?
We observed people were supported in a kind and attentive way. We saw that care staff showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people.
People who used the service, their relatives and staff completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where suggestions or concerns had been raised the provider had listened and made changes to the service.
People's preferences, interests and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.
' Is the service responsive?
Staff knew the people they cared for and understood their preferences and personal histories.
We saw that people's care needs were kept under review and care plans, risk assessments and support plans were updated as required.
' Is the service safe?
Systems were in place to make sure that the registered manager and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped to ensure that the service continually improved.
The people who used the service told us they were happy and that they felt safe. We saw that people were treated with respect and dignity by staff.
The home had policies and procedures in relation to safeguarding vulnerable adults. Staff had completed training in how to safeguard vulnerable adults. This meant that people were safeguarded as required.
The service was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment was checked and serviced regularly so people who used the service were not put at unnecessary risk.
' Is the service effective?
People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required.
' Is the service well led?
The service had quality assurance systems in place and records we looked at showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly.
The provider consulted with people about how the service was run and took account of their views.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.
What people who used the service and those that matter to them said about the care and support they received.
We asked people if their needs were met by appropriately skilled staff and were told, 'They are ever so good, they treat me so well.' Another person said, 'The staff know what I need and help me when I ask them; what else could you ask for.'
One person told us, 'I think they (the management) do listen to our point of view, they've certainly put on trips that we like to do.'
A relative we spoke with explained, 'We don't have any concerns about the home, he (the person who used the service) is safe here, the staff manage all his care and look after his medication so he is safer here then he was before he moved in.'