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, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.
If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. One person who used the service told us 'This is my home, the staff are so nice and caring'.
Systems were in place to make sure that both managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents and responded to complaints and concerns.
The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.
Policies and procedures were in place to make sure that unsafe practices were identified and the people were protected.
Is the service effective?
People we spoke with told us they were happy with the care they received and felt their needs had been met. From our observations and also speaking with the staff it was clear that staff understood people's care and support needs and they knew them well. One person told us 'I have everything I could wish for, staff are so supportive'.
Staff had received training and ongoing development to meet the needs of the people living at the home.
Is the service caring?
Staff were attentive and kind to the people who needed support. Staff told us they encouraged people to maintain their independence.
People's preferences, interests and diverse needs had been recorded in the care plans we viewed.
People who used the service had been offered a quality assurance survey to complete. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised they had been addressed and discussed with the person.
Is the service responsive?
People's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. Information had been recorded on detailed care and support plans. People told us they regularly discuss their needs with their support worker.
People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. The complaint's policy was displayed on a notice board to remind people.
People who lived at the home completed a range of activities. One person we spoke with told us 'I like gardening and spending time with the pets. We have fish, rabbits and chickens'.
Is the service well-led?
The service worked with other agencies and services to make sure people received care in a joined up way.
A quality assurance system was in place and records we viewed showed regular audits on the service and that any shortfalls had been addressed by the manager. 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 that were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.