3 July 2014
During a routine inspection
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service and a visiting relative, the staff and from looking at records.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
The service was safe?
Practices in the service protected people, staff and visitors from the risk of harm. Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learned from accidents and incidents, concerns, complaints, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service continually improve.
Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to obtaining medicine. The system was straightforward and all medicine was checked into the service and recorded appropriately to ensure people's safety.
Each person had a care plan detailing their support and care needs. There was guidance for staff to follow to reduce risks and strategies implemented to make sure people were as safe as possible.
CQC monitors the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLs) which applies to care homes. Care documentation viewed showed that mental capacity had been considered. Where people lacked capacity and decisions were made on people's behalf the documentation reflected that the service had consulted with relatives / friends or advocates. This was needed to show that the service had acted in people's best interest and that people's human rights and rights of choice were not compromised. DOL's (Depravation of liberty safeguards) assessments had not been considered for any of the people using the service as peoples liberty was not restricted. The manager agreed to keep this under review.
Is the service effective?
The service was effective overall. People told us that they were happy with the care that they received and that their care needs were met. One person we spoke with told us, 'I am very happy here I have no concerns'. A relative said " Staff treat my Mother well. I am happy she is here". We saw that staff were attentive to people using the service and responded promptly when needed. People's health and care needs were assessed with them and /or their representatives where possible.
Is the service caring?
The service was caring. People were supported by kind and attentive staff. Staff showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. People we spoke with said they felt staff respected their privacy and dignity and staff were polite and caring.
People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We reviewed and discussed with staff the care records of four people who lived within the service. These had sufficient detail and guidelines about the support needed to meet the people's needs.
Is the service responsive?
The service was responsive. People told us that they were happy with the service. It was clear from observations and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs.
We found that the manager and staff were approachable and encouraged people to voice any concerns or ideas for change. People were consulted and were given the opportunity to contribute towards the running of the service. We noted evidence of regular meetings which enabled people to air their views.
People who used the service were weighed regularly and weight fluctuations were noted and acted upon. We found that food and fluid intake were appropriately logged and that special diet requirements were respected where needed. This meant that the provider was responsive and made reasonable adjustments in service provision to meet people's individual needs.
We found that people were supported to attend health appointments, such as, doctors or dentists. We saw records to show that the service worked closely with health and social care professionals to maintain and improve people's health and well-being.
Is the service well-led?
Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the different policies and procedures. They knew where to access them and where they get further advice from. Staff told us that they felt well supported and were given the information they needed to support the people who lived in the service.
The manager took an active role in the running of the home and met with staff and people who lived in the service to listen to what they had to say. We saw minutes of regular staff meetings where changes or issues with peoples' care were discussed. In addition, we saw evidence of meetings with people who used the service to ensure they were consulted and encouraged to contribute their ideas about running the service.
You can see our judgements on the front page of this report.