Archived: The Cherries

People’s experience of using this service:

People continued to receive safe care from staff who had been provided with safeguarding training. There were detailed risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety. Staffing numbers were being maintained to keep people safe and the registered manager followed the established recruitment procedures to ensure staff employed were suitable for their role.

People’s medicines were managed safely and in line with best practice guidelines. Accidents and incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence.

People’s needs and choices were assessed and their care provided in line with their preferences. Staff received an induction and on-going training to ensure they could provide care based on current best practice when supporting people. Plans were compiled with the involvement of the person and their relative where required. Care plans were personalised and provided staff with guidance about how to support people and respect their wishes.

People received enough to eat and drink and were supported to access health professionals when required, including opticians and doctors. Staff provided support to people when needed to make sure they received continuing healthcare to meet their needs.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible and upheld their legal rights. People were encouraged to make decisions about how their care was provided and their privacy and dignity were protected and promoted by staff. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People continued to receive care from staff who were kind and caring. People had developed positive relationships with staff who had a good understanding of their needs and preferences.

The service continued to be well managed. People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service. Staff felt well-supported and had opportunities to share ideas, and exchange information. Effective systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided through a range of internal checks and audits. The registered manager was aware of their responsibility to report events that occurred within the service to the CQC and external agencies.

The home continued to meet the characteristics of a rating of good in all areas. More information about the inspection is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection:

The service was rated Good at the last inspection; the last report was published in July 2016.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

.

The Cherries provides accommodation for up to eight people who require personal care. On the day of our inspection there were seven people living at the home. People who lived at the home were elderly and had needs associated with old age and dementia.

There was a registered manager in post and she was present during our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they felt safe at the home, and staff had received training to ensure they knew how to recognise and report and concerns. We found risks to people were managed in a way to keep them safe. There was sufficient staff to support people and meet their needs. People received their medicines safely and as they had been prescribed.

The registered manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff knew about people’s individual capacity to make decisions and supported people to make their own decisions.

Staff had developed positive relationships with people and they knew about their life and daily choices. People were encouraged to be independent and their privacy and dignity was respected. People were supported to maintain good health; we saw that staff alerted health care professionals if they had any concerns about their health. People knew how to make a complaint and were confident that their complaint would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary.

People described the registered manager and provider as approachable and they said they felt the service was well managed. Arrangements were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service, so that actions could be put in place to drive improvement. The management of the home was open and transparent.

We observed staff interacting with people in a way that allowed people to give their consent to care through body gestures and staff knowledge of people. One person said, "Staff do ask me what I would like".

Staff we spoke with were aware of people's individual needs and records showed that people's care was planned and delivered how they wanted it. One person said, "The staff here are kind and helpful".

We found that the provider had a system in place for the management of infection control.

We found that there was enough staff to care for people safely. A relative said, 'Staff are always visible in the home'.

The provider had a complaints system in place to enable people and relatives to share their views and concerns.