On the day of our inspection five people were living at the home. We spoke with people who used the service and a relative. People we spoke with were unable to tell us their views about their experience in any detail. When asked if they were happy at the home they said, 'Yes'. A relative we spoke with said, 'X loves it there'. During the inspection we sampled people's care records and spoke with staff. They helped us to answer the five questions we always ask which are: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?
People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. Care plans identified people's needs and were reviewed regularly. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's needs. People were given choices and supported to make decisions themselves. Risk assessments were in place and control measures identified. This meant that people's needs were met and people were kept safe.
The home had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff received ongoing training in the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards. This meant that systems were in place to safeguard people as required.
People were protected against the risks associated with medication because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. Only staff that had been trained administered medication.
Robust recruitment procedures were in place. New staff underwent an induction and shadowed other staff. We saw that legal checks and Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were made. This meant that people received care and support from staff who were competent and of good integrity.
Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints and concerns. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.
Is the service effective?
People experienced care, and support that met their needs. People were encouraged to remain as independent as possible and to participate in a range of activities and outings Records showed people, their relatives and professionals were involved in care reviews. This meant that people's needs were met.
People were able to move around the home freely and safely. Communication aids such symbols and pictures were available throughout the home. This enabled people to communicate their needs and staff to offer choices. Regular audits and checks took place. Issues identified were acted on. This meant the service had effective systems in place to identify improvements and continually meet people's needs.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that support workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. We saw people responded positively to staff. A relative we spoke with confirmed they felt the service was safe and caring.
People's preferences, likes, dislikes and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes. People were involved in their day to day care and were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them. We saw that people were supported to fulfil their dreams and their diversity and individuality were promoted and respected.
Is the service responsive?
We saw staff that responded quickly to meet people's needs and ensured people's safety was maintained. For example, we saw staff understand a person communicating their needs through their behaviour. The person was supported to have a drink. We saw that people were supported to express their views and these were acted on. People had the opportunity to engage in activities both in the home and within the community.
People were reminded about the complaints process but no complaints had recently been received. A relative we spoke with told us how the service had responded to a concern they had identified. The relative told us, 'I am so happy, I can relax knowing X is well-cared for'.
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. Staff felt supported in their roles and felt their views were listened too. A relative we spoke with confirmed they felt the service was well led.
The service had a quality assurance system. A new quality audit had been developed and was in the process of being used. This meant the quality of the service was continually improving.