22 April 2014
During a routine inspection
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, seeking experience and views from people who used the service 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?
The home had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. No applications had needed to be submitted this year. The manager and team leader had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.
There were effective systems in place where people did not have capacity and best interest decisions were made through a multi-agency approach. All staff understood this and why this was important to people they supported.
The service was clean and hygienic. Appropriate guidance, equipment and facilities were in place for staff so that people were safe and protected from the risks associated with cross infection.
Is the service effective?
People's health and welfare was protected and promoted because the service sought expertise and support from other health and social care services that people required in order to meet their needs effectively.
People received appropriate care and support because there were effective systems in place to assess, plan, implement, monitor and evaluate people's needs. People were involved throughout these processes. This ensured their needs were clearly identified and the support they received was meaningful and person centred.
Is the service caring?
Staff had a good awareness of individuals' needs and treated people in a warm and respectful manner. We saw people were receiving care and support in a sensitive way during our visit.
The manager, team leader and staff were knowledgeable about people's lives before they moved into the home. Every effort was made to enhance this knowledge so that their life experiences remained meaningful.
There was a constant interaction between staff and people in the home; everyone was relaxed, happy and comfortable in each other's company. People were positive about their experiences.
Is the service responsive?
Systems were in place to make sure that the manager and staff learnt from significant events including accidents and incidents. Audits helped determine why a particular incident may have happened and what further action was required to help prevent reoccurrence.
People using the service and their relatives completed surveys each year. We saw from previous surveys that where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed promptly. It was noted that this had been overlooked in 2013 and that surveys had not been sent.
The service had responded promptly and effectively to non-compliance that we had identified at the inspection of September 2013.
Is the service well-led?
The manager, team leader and staff continued to look at the needs of people who used the service and ways to improve these for people. Because it was a small home with a small staff team, people's views and preferences were sought on a daily basis.
The manager had systems in place to assess and monitor that staff had suitable competency, knowledge and skills through effective training and mentoring. Staff were motivated, caring, trained and supported in order to support people effectively.