The inspection team was made up of one inspector. There were 5 people using the service during our inspection. We spoke to four of the people who lived at the home and the commissioners of the service.We set out to answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with people using the service, the staff supporting them and looking at records. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
People told us or indicated that they felt safe in the home. Comments included: "I feel safe here" and "I like it here."
We spoke with two of the people working in the home on the day of the inspection and they had an understanding of their roles in keeping people who lived in the home safe. Staff records showed that staff had received appropriate safeguarding training and we saw that there were videos available to refresh this training.
There were no people with restrictions placed on them through the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS). These safeguards apply where it is thought that it is in someone's best interests for decisions to be made on their behalf where they lacked the capacity to make a specific decision. Differing arrangements had been put in place to assist people with their financial management that took into account the person's capacity to understand and legal arrangements were in place for some people.
Risks to individual people's safety and welfare had been assessed in respect of people's health conditions however, immediate action had not been taken where other risks were identified. For example where physical risks were identified to the outdoor area no immediate action had been taken. We found that there were occasions when staff were not available in the home when the people who use the service were out of the home unaccompanied by staff and could have returned unplanned.
Is the service effective?
People we spoke with indicated that they were generally happy living at the home. We saw that people were assisted when they asked for support. We saw that people were assisted to manage their anxieties and talk about actions that may pose a risk.
We looked at parts of three people's care plans and found that service was updating these plans to make it easier to find information and ensure that people's needs were met. However, we found that these were not being updated in a consistent way and this could make it more difficult to find information that is needed to ensure people remain safe or have their needs met appropriately.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by staff who spoke positively about them. We saw that care staff responded well when people asked for help or asked them questions. Comments from people who lived in the home included: "They (staff) are my friends....they help me" and "The staff are good... I don't mind the student nurses coming, they are good too."
We looked at two people's activities and found that people undertook a range of activities during the day that they wanted to do.
The four people we saw were dressed appropriately, comfortably and appeared well groomed and cared for. There was evidence that people's individuality was respected in decisions they had made about the style of their appearance.
Is the service responsive?
At our last inspection in February 2014 we had identified that the home was not meeting some regulations. Whilst we found that there had been improvements in all areas there had not been enough action taken to ensure that records were consistently recorded and cross referenced so that information could be quickly retrieved.
Changes had been needed to ensure that the views gained from people who lived in the home and other involved people were detailed enough to enable the service to continually improve. We found that this whilst plans were in place to improve involving and consulting with people these had yet to be fully implemented.
Is the service well led?
The home was managed by a registered manager who had worked at the home since it was registered with us. They knew the people who lived there very well. However information about risks and outcomes of health meetings was not always organised in a way that it can be easily found should they be unavailable.