2 October 2017
During a routine inspection
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good and met all the fundamental standards we inspect against.
People were safe. Staff had a clear understanding on how to safeguard people and protect their health and well-being. People had a range of individualised risk assessments to keep them safe and to help them maintain their independence. Where risks to people had been identified, risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. Staff were aware of people's needs and followed guidance to keep them safe. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to ensure peoples safety.
The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Although the registered manager was absent on the day of inspection, we were joined by a manager from another location under the same provider.
The Manager who was supporting the service on inspection and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and applied its principles in their work. Where people were thought to lack capacity to make certain decisions, assessments had been completed in line with the principles of MCA. The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS); these provide legal safeguards for people who may be deprived of their liberty for their own safety.
Staff received a wide range of training to ensure they could support people safely and received support to carry out their roles effectively. People felt supported by competent staff that benefitted from regular meetings with their line manager and team meetings to help them meet the needs of the people they cared for. People's nutritional needs were met. People were given choices and were supported to have their meals when they needed them. People received care that was personalised to meet their needs. People were supported to maintain their health and were referred for specialist advice as required. There were good systems that ensured safe transitioning between services. Staff knew the people they cared for and what was important to them. Staff appreciated people's life histories and understood how these could influence the way people wanted to be cared for. Staff supported and encouraged people to engage with a variety of social activities of their choice in house and in the community. Staff treated people with kindness, compassion and respect and promoted people's independence and right to privacy.
The service looked for ways to continually improve the quality of the service. Feedback was sought from people and their relatives and used to improve the care. People knew how to make a complaint and complaints were managed in accordance with the provider's complaints policy. Leadership within the service was open, transparent and promoted strong staff values. This had resulted in a caring culture that put the people they supported at its centre.
People, their relatives and staff were complimentary about the management team and how the service was run. The registered manager informed us of all notifiable incidents. Staff spoke positively about the management support and leadership they received from the management team.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.