A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and 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, their relatives, 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 safe?
Systems had been in place to make sure that the registered manager and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.
People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had made improvements following out last inspection in November 2013. There were now appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.
Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberties Safeguards which applies to care homes. The provider had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. There was a current application in place for one person and further work was planned to review all people in the home. This meant that people would be safeguarded as required.
Is the service effective?
People's health and care needs were assessed with them, but they were not always involved in writing their care plans due to their conditions. The provider had also considered information and involvement from relatives, other health professionals and staff. Relatives told us: 'They listen to what we have to say so they understand why he might do certain things' and: 'They keep us up to date with any changes'.
We saw that people's preferred routines, likes and dislikes had been recorded and staff knew about them. Visitors confirmed that they were able to see people in private and that visiting times were flexible and the home were accommodating and welcoming.
The staff told us told us their training had been kept current and that they had received formal supervisions. This meant the provider demonstrated that staff employed to work at the home had the skills and experience needed to support the people living there.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. A relative told us: 'I am here every day, it's like my home. The staff know us well and are very caring'.
Staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of people's individual needs, and knew how to support people so that their needs were met. Staff spoke about people as individuals and we observed that staff listened to people's views and opinions.
Is the service responsive?
People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly and the provider had staff dedicated to arranging and supporting people to attend these activities.
We saw the home had been responsive to people's changing needs and had responded to professional advice that had been provided. For example, we saw the home had requested one person to be reassessed due to their changing needs. Appropriate support had then been arranged to meet the person's needs.
Is the service well-led?
The provider had a quality assurance system in place. We saw records that identified shortfalls and the actions that had been taken to address them. The provider listened and responded to people, staff and visitors who had left comments and suggestions.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff told us that they felt the home reflected people's care and welfare needs. They told us that the system in place meant they felt supported in their role and where to find information when needed. For example, there was information for each person for the staff to follow and record the care provided.