During our previous inspection of January 2014 we found non-compliance with the law concerning care and welfare, quality monitoring and safety, availability and suitability of equipment. The provider told us that they would take action to improve. We carried out this inspection to monitor the progress made on previous compliance actions. We only inspected for part of the day and we focused on the areas where improvements were needed.No-one knew we would be visiting as our inspection was unannounced. During our inspection we spoke with seven people, three relatives, four staff, two visiting health professionals, the deputy and registered manager.
There were 27 people living at the home when we inspected. We saw that interactions between staff and people who lived at the home were friendly and relaxed.
The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with people who used the service, the staff supporting them, and by looking at records. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
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?
We found that where staff had identified concerns regarding risks associated with people's health and welfare they had been referred to appropriate agencies.
We identified that arrangements were in place so that equipment was maintained and safe for people to use.
Records did not always accurately reflect the care given, which could lead to people not getting the care they needed to stay safe.
Is the service effective?
All people, relatives and staff we spoke with told us that people who used the service were safe and well cared for which gave assurance that an effective service was provided.
Staff received support from senior staff to ensure they carried out their role effectively. Staff we spoke with told us that they felt well supported.
Arrangements were in place to request heath, social and medical support to help keep people well.
Staff knew about people's needs. However, records we looked at did not highlight all people's needs which meant that there was a potential that specific needs might not be met.
Is the service caring?
We saw that interactions between staff and people who lived at the home were friendly and relaxed.
The staff knew of people's care and support needs which ensured that individual personal care was provided in a way that people preferred.
Is the service responsive?
We found that the provider had taken note of our previous concerns and had learnt from past experiences. For example, improvements had been made regarding complaints processes and monitoring the service which would ensure that people's needs were better met.
Is the service well led?
A registered manager was in post which meant that the provider was complying with the law, as it is a requirement to have a registered manager and consistency and familiarity was provided.
Staff were generally organised to ensure people's needs were met and the required support was available.