A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions: is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people who used the service, the relatives and staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.
If you'd like to see the evidence that supports our summary you can read the full report.
Is the service safe?
We saw that people were assisted to move safely and with the appropriate equipment. People received medication from appropriately qualified staff who had followed the correct procedures for storing and preparing medicines. Staff we spoke with demonstrated a good level of knowledge regarding safeguarding procedures. The home had an adequate number of experienced staff on duty to cater for people's needs and people knew the staff well.
We spoke with four people living in the home, all of whom told us they were protected from avoidable harm. One person told us, "I've been here two years. I love it here and the staff are rarely off sick".
Is the service effective?
We saw that people were able to make choices about how they spent their time. People had the opportunity to join in a range of activities, such as chair aerobics, if they wanted to. People's care plans took account of their interests and routines. The staff who worked in the home encouraged people to maintain their independence, for example with their mobility.
One person explained how they spent some of their time reading and knitting. They told us, "I do knitting for charity. It goes to Africa". Another person told us, "I can do whatever I want".
Is the service caring?
We saw staff treated people with dignity and respect. Staff were experienced, knowledgeable and knew people's needs well. People, relatives and staff told us the manager was very approachable.
People we spoke with told us the staff were kind and helpful. One person told us the night staff had been "awful" in the last home they lived in but they were very good in this home. One relative told us, "I can't fault this one. The last home used loads of agency staff".
Is the service responsive?
We found the home responded well to the needs of people who lived there. Prompt action was taken when people were ill or needed treatment and information from health care professionals who visited was disseminated effectively.
We spoke with a health care professional who visited on the day of our visit. They told us they were always called promptly, when necessary. One person told us, "I had a chest infection a while ago and the doctor came the same day".
Is the service well-led?
We saw that people's views were sought in a variety of ways such as from a visible presence by the manager and in completing surveys. People, staff and relatives told us they could talk to the manager about anything. Regular audits, to help ensure the smooth running of the home, were carried out in accordance with the law.
All four people we spoke with told us the manager was very good. One relative told us the home had been recommended to them and they, in turn, had recommended it to someone else. One relative said, "We get questionnaires annually and quite a few changes have happened as a result".