A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, is the service effective, is the service caring, is the service responsive, is the service well led?Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed, and the records we looked at. If you want to see evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.
We spoke with three people who used the service, the registered and deputy manager, three staff and five family members. Whilst we were able to speak with people, our conversations were limited because of their complex health conditions. We reviewed the care plans of three people.
This is a summary of what we found:
Is the service safe?
All family members told us they felt their family member was safe in the care of staff. Two of the 11 members of staff had received safeguarding and whistleblowing training in the last three years.
Systems were in place to ensure that staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents. This reduced the risks to people.
During our inspection we assessed how the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 was being implemented. This is a law which provides a system of assessment and decision making to protect people who do not have capacity to give consent. We also looked at Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS aim to make sure people in care homes and hospitals are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom. We saw that some people were unable to leave the home without the assistance of staff. This may mean deprivation of liberty authorisations were required. We saw one application for a DoL which had been authorised.
People and their family members told us that their dignity was respected.
Is the service effective?
We observed from speaking with staff and watching how they communicated with people that staff had an understanding of people's care and support needs and knew them well.
Staff assessed people's health and care needs with the person and their family members. Staff told us care plans assisted them to meet people's needs. We saw information in care plans included risk assessments and these were sufficiently detailed to guide staff.
We saw that not all staff received regular supervision or appraisals. We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements and meet the legal requirements in relation to supporting staff.
Is the service caring?
Care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. One person said, 'Staff are helpful,' another said they were, 'Fine.' A third person said they (the staff) were, 'Very kind.' One family member said, "Staff are very helpful and caring.' Another family member said they were, 'Happy with staff.'
People's preferences, interests and diverse needs were recorded, and care and support was provided in accordance with the wishes of people using the service and their families.
Is the service responsive?
People took part in activities within the home and the wider community.
All family members told us they knew how to make a complaint. We saw there was a process in place to respond to any issues of concern.
Is the service well-led?
This service has quality assurance systems to identify and address issues. All members of staff we spoke with were clear about their roles and responsibilities.