This inspection was carried out by one inspector. We met with ten people who used the service and observed their experiences of care to support our inspection. We spoke with the registered manager, four staff, and two relatives. We considered our inspection findings to answer 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?
Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary, please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
People were cared for in an environment that was clean and hygienic. People told us that they were happy living at the home and were supported to remain independent as safely as possible. They also told us that they felt their needs were met because staff supported them. People also told us that they felt safe living at the home and their relatives confirmed this. We saw safeguarding procedures were in place and that staff understood how to safeguard the people that they supported. People were protected against the use of unlawful or excessive control or restraint because the provider had made suitable arrangements.
We found a shortfall in the accuracy of care records, including for example; risk assessments, nutrition tools, and personal evacuation plans. This meant that people were at risk of unsafe or inappropriate care and support. We asked the provider to tell us what they were going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to the maintenance of accurate and appropriate records.
The registered manager had suitable arrangements to safeguard people from foreseeable emergencies.
There were general risk assessments in place to protect people who lived at the home, staff and visitors.
There were regular audits completed to make sure that the building and procedures were maintained and further improved and provided a safe environment for people to live in, although we found that not all actions were completed.
Is the service effective?
All of the people we spoke with and their relatives, told us that they were happy with the care that was delivered and their needs were met.
We were told that a new activity coordinator was being recruited to ensure that activities were maximised within the home.
We saw staff displayed a good understanding of the people they cared for. We observed staff calming down one person who had become agitated by talking with them about a hobby they liked.
Staff had received training to meet the needs of the people who lived at the home.
Is the service caring?
People told us that were happy with the care provided and that the staff were caring. One relative told us, 'The staff have been very good to me and my family.'
Observations during the visit showed staff were compassionate and caring to the people they supported. We saw staff responded quickly to people who required support.
We saw from records that people who lived at the home had been escorted to hospital by staff when a visit was required. This meant that people, particularly those with dementia related health conditions, were provided with familiar staff faces to support them outside of their usual environment.
Is the service responsive?
Information was collected by the service with regard to the person's ability and level of independence. Regular reviews were carried out to make sure the person's care and support needs had not changed.
Information collected by the service also gave staff an insight into the interests, likes and dislikes of people in their care. Staff told us this information enabled them to understand what was important to the people who lived at the home.
Staff were knowledgeable about the support needs of people and the services ethos of maintaining safe independence and involvement of the person whatever their level of need.
One relative told us that they had been impressed by the level of communication they had received since their relative had moved into the home. They told us, 'Staff have not only looked after my relative, but me and my family too.'
Meetings took place with staff and the people who lived at the home, to discuss the running of the service and to ensure the service was responsive to people's changing needs. People who lived at the home were able to discuss their views. This meant that people were involved in communications about the running of the home and staff listened and took action. People we spoke with confirmed they felt that they were listened to and knew who to contact if they had a problem. One person told us about changes to the menu that had occurred when they had verbally complained.
Is the service well-led?
People who used the service had regular contact from the registered manager and other senior staff to check their wellbeing. The quality of service provided by care givers was monitored and this was done through quality audits and also through meetings arranged with the people who used the service.