We carried out this inspection as part of our routine inspection programme to answer our five questions. Is the service safe, is it effective, is it caring, is it responsive and is it well led? The inspection was carried out by a single inspector. At the time of our inspection there were 24 people using the service. We spoke with six of them and two visitors in order to understand the service from their point of view. We observed the care and support people received in the shared areas of the home. We looked at records and files. We spoke with the registered provider and six members of staff.This is a summary of what people told us and what we found.
Is the service safe?
People told us they felt safe and comfortable in the home. They said they had good relationships with staff. One person said the staff were 'patient', and another said they could not 'praise them enough'. There were sufficient staff employed to support people safely.
We saw staff were mindful of people's welfare and safety. They used hoists and other equipment in a safe manner to help them move around the home. If people sat outside, staff made sure they had sun cream.
Is the service effective?
People told us they were satisfied with the care and support they received. One person said, 'I get the support I need when I need it.' Another person said they were 'very happy here'. People told us they received their medicine when they needed it.
We found people's care and support were based on assessments of their needs. Care plans were detailed and personalised. Systems were in place to ensure care was delivered according to people's plans.
However we found instructions and records relating to prescribed creams and ointments were not maintained in a way that assured us they were applied appropriately. The service had not taken advice before administering crushed medication. We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements and meet the requirements of the law in relation to the administration of prescribed creams and ointments.
Is the service caring?
People using the service told us they got on well with their care workers and other staff and had a good relationship with them.
Staff we spoke with were motivated to provide good care. They knew about people's needs and how they preferred to have their care delivered. One member of staff said they were 'very happy' people were looked after properly.
We observed positive, friendly interactions between staff and people who used the service. Staff took time to make sure people understood, spoke clearly and made eye contact with the person they were talking to. The provider was taking steps to ensure people were cared for in a pleasant, well-maintained environment.
We found people were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. They were treated with dignity and respect, and their preferences were taken into account. People's independence was promoted as much as possible.
Is the service responsive?
People told us they had been involved in their assessments and care planning, and their views and preferences were taken into account. They told us staff listened to them. People's care plans were individualised and person-centred.
We found the service had systems in place to ensure the care provided was appropriate to people's changing needs. People were supported by other healthcare providers as appropriate.
Is the service well-led?
Staff told us they were supported to deliver quality care. People who used the service were satisfied with the care and support they received.
We found risks were assessed and appropriate action plans were in place in people's individual care plans. However there was not an effective system in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service provided. We did not find evidence of processes in place to review and learn from incidents, accidents and complaints. We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements and meet the requirements of the law in relation to assessing and monitoring the quality of service provided.
In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulated activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a registered manager on our register at the time. A new manager was in the process of applying to be registered.