At our inspection we gathered evidence to help us answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?Below is the summary of what we found but if you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report. The summary is based on speaking with people who used the service, the staff supporting them, our observations and from looking at records.
Is the service safe?
We saw that people who used the service were treated with dignity and their rights were respected. One person told us, 'It's okay here, they look after us all very well.' Another person told us, 'I can go out and I tell the staff when I will be back. They do that so that they know I am alright, and safe.'
All the people we spoke with said they felt safe in the home and visitors said they felt their relatives/friends were safe. People who used the service also told us they felt they got the care and support they needed, when they needed it.
The home had safe systems in place to ensure people received their medication as prescribed. Staff were assessed for competency prior to administering medication and this was reassessed regularly.
Is the service effective?
We asked people who used the service about their care and if they were able to make decisions affecting their lives. People told us they were always asked for their consent before care tasks were carried out and that they were used to making decisions for themselves. We saw that some people had signed their individual care records, indicating they agreed with the content and the intervention from staff. One person told us, 'We have our ups and downs, we sometimes agree amongst ourselves but we always get on. We look after one another too.' Others in the room agreed with this comment.
Staff we spoke with showed a good understanding of protecting people's rights to refuse care and support. They said they would always explain the risks from refusing care or support and try to discuss alternative options to give people more choice and control over their decisions.
Is the service caring?
Throughout our observations we saw staff treated people with kindness, patience and courtesy. We saw staff encouraging people when giving support, making sure the person understood the task being undertaken and maintaining their independence. People told us, 'You don't need to worry, we get everything we need. We are looked after very well.' A visitor told us, 'X has been the happiest she has ever been now she is living here. X seems to trust the staff and that has helped her a lot.'
Is the service responsive?
Care records showed that people's needs were assessed. We found information was clearly recorded to show how a person's needs should be met. We saw people who used the service were responded to promptly when they asked for any support or assistance.
Is the service well led?
Staff said they felt the service was well managed and the manager was approachable and committed to her role. They said they had confidence that if any issues were brought to her attention they would be dealt with properly and thoroughly. However, staff were not receiving regular supervision or training.
There was a lack of evidence that staff had received regular training and that this was being monitored by the manager or provider. There was also a lack of evidence of records, and from staff feedback, that supervision was being undertaken on a regular basis by the senior management team.
We found that the provider had no systems in place to identify, assess or manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others. People who used the service were invited to attend house meetings, these were poorly attended, however, the provider had not developed alternative ways to see their views about the service.