We spoke with seven of the 16 people who used the service. We spoke with two people's relatives, two staff members and the registered manager. We looked at three people's care records. Other records viewed included audits, minutes of meetings, staff training records, personnel records, health and safety checks, and satisfaction questionnaires. We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask: Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well-led?This is a summary of what we found:
Is the service safe?
When we arrived at the service the staff asked to see our identification. This meant that the appropriate actions were taken to ensure that the people who used the service were protected from others who did not have the right to access their home.
We saw records which showed that the health and safety in the service was regularly checked. This included regular checks on such areas as fire safety equipment, wheelchairs, hoists as well as checks on the environment. This told us people were looked after safely.
We saw that the staff were provided with training in safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse, Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant that staff were provided with the information that they needed to ensure that people were safeguarded.
We saw that staff were recruited appropriately and employed after appropriate checks were completed. This meant people were cared for safely by staff who had the correct skills.
Is the service effective?
People's care records showed that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. The records were regularly reviewed and updated which meant that staff were provided with up to date information about how people's needs were to be met.
Is the service caring?
We saw that people were relaxed in the company of each other and staff. We saw that staff were attentive to people's needs. Staff we spoke with were able to demonstrate they knew people well. We saw staff treated people with dignity and respect.
Is the service responsive?
People who used the service were provided with the opportunity to participate in activities which interested them. People's choices were taken in to account and listened to. This was demonstrated in minutes we saw which related to meetings with people who used the service. People's care records showed that, where appropriate, support and guidance was sought from health care professionals, including a doctor, social worker, chiropodist and district nurse. This told us that the service worked well with other professionals and that people's needs were met.
Is the service well-led
The service had a number of quality assurance measures in place. The manager was very proactive in monitoring and looking for ways to improve the service. This included taking part in pilot studies with the tissue viability nurse. We saw the quality of the service had been maintained.