We spoke with ten people using the service, six relatives, two visitors of people using the service and sixteen staff. The staff included the manager, operations director, finance director, two nurses, one cook, one maintenance person and nine care staff.We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five 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?
This is a summary of what we found:
Is the service safe?
Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 which meant people received the appropriate support to be able to make their own decisions, or where required decisions involving appropriate people were made in the best interests of the person.
Staff were trained and responsive to any signs of abuse and avoidable harm. People reported that they felt safe and well cared for. Any risks to people were assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure people's individual needs were being met safely.
Staffing levels had been increased since the last inspection and levels were under review weekly so that people's needs could be met appropriately.
The home was clean and arrangements were in place to control and prevent infection.
Is the service effective?
New staff underwent induction training and all staff had opportunities to attend training so that they could care and support people effectively.
Staff valued people's diverse needs and were able to communicate with people in their preferred language so that people had a good understanding of their care and treatment and were able to make informed decisions.
People had access to healthcare professionals to meet their needs and the service worked well with other healthcare professionals to coordinate people's care.
Is the service caring?
During our inspection, we observed staff were caring and people were treated with dignity and respect. People told us they were happy, well cared for and treated with respect.
People were involved in their care and care plans provided staff with guidance on how to meet people's needs.
Comments we received included 'there are always loving people around you', 'some of the carers are very caring and very good, sometimes they can have an off day, just like me and you' and 'it is like a family here'.
Is the service responsive?
People where possible were involved in making decisions about their care. People were supported to attend activities within the service and in the community.
Relatives told us they were always kept up to date with the condition of their family member. People were enabled to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives.
Is the service well-led?
The provider and manager actively sought the views of people and their representatives so that areas for improvements could be identified and addressed.
All the staff we spoke with said they were supported to carry out their role and were provided with support and training. They told us they were able to raise any concerns they had with the manager and provider.
The provider had in place systems to monitor the quality of the service and where shortfalls were identified action plans with timescales were drawn up to address them.