During our inspection we asked the provider, staff and people who used the service specific 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, speaking with people using the service, their relatives, and the staff supporting them and from looking at records.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
People told us they were treated with respect and with dignity by the staff.
Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents.This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.
The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The manager told us one application had needed to be submitted and was now waiting for a response from the local authority to address this. We found relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and in how to submit one. This meant people were safeguarded as required.
Staff had training on, equality and diversity, and they understood it and knew how to put it into practice.
The service was not well maintained and this compromised people's welfare, privacy choice and dignity. We have asked the provider to make improvements.
The registered manager sets the staff rotas, they told us they took people's care needs into account when making decisions about the staffing numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required. This helped to ensure that people's needs were met.
Is the service effective?
People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they or their representatives were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, social, mobility, equipment and care needs had been identified in care plans where required. Some people said they had been involved in writing them and they reflected their current needs.
We spoke with the chef and looked at the arrangements for specialist diets and discussed how they met people's preferences. The chef demonstrated a good understanding of people's nutritional needs and showed us the records they kept of individuals food preferences, allergies, special diets and their likes and dislikes.
People confirmed they were able to see visitors in private and that visiting times were flexible.
Is the service caring?
People told us they were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. People commented, 'I never feel rushed by the staff that help me, they do everything for me and help me to do things for myself'.
People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised, we saw these had generally been addressed by the provider.
People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs were recorded and care and support was provided in accordance with people's wishes.
Is the service responsive?
People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly. The home had its own adapted minibus, which helped to keep people involved with their local community.
Is the service well-led?
The service had a quality assurance system. The records we looked at showed any shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuingly improving.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and the quality assurance systems in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service.
We reviewed the minutes of meetings, social activity calendars and, records of visits by or on behalf of the provider where appropriate we saw action plans were in place to make improvements to the service had been recorded. We saw staff supervision and appraisal sessions were regularly happening.