Our inspection team was made up of one inspector. We considered our 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 a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, their relatives, the staff who supported them and from looking at records. We took into consideration the views of other health and social care professionals and from commissioners of the service by talking with them and looking at their reports.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe.
Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve. Regular checks were undertaken to ensure the environment was safe.
CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. When applications had needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were followed. The provider kept CQC informed of any applications.
The service was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment was well maintained and serviced regularly. Therefore people were not put at unnecessary risk.
The registered manager ensured the needs of people were reviewed at least monthly and staffing levels adjusted to meet those needs.
Is the service effective?
Care plans we looked at reflected people's care needs and they said that were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required.
People's needs were taken into account with signage and the layout of the service enabling people to move around freely and safely.
People told us they could express their views on a one to one basis with staff and by completing surveys.
There was a complaints process in place and people told us all staff were approachable and they would be able to raise concerns if they wanted too. Where this had happened staff had reacted quickly and outcomes reached for the satisfaction of all parties.
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.
People commented, "Staff are brilliant here" and "Staff meet my needs every day and ask me what I want to do each day."
People who used the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service attended meetings throughout the year. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed. People told us they felt their opinions were valued.
People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.
Is the service responsive?
People told us they could speak with staff each day and share their concerns. They told us staff acted quickly. Relatives told us they could speak with staff about their family member's needs, when that person could not make decisions for themselves.
Is the service well-led?
The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.
The service had a quality assurance system. Records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed.. As a result the quality of the service was continuously improving.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes that were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.