A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, is the service effective, is the service caring, is the service responsive, is the service well led?During the inspection we spoke with all of the four people who used the service. We spent time observing and we spoke with a care worker, the administrator, the general manager, two other managers and the registered manager. Following the inspection we spoke with two social workers and a healthcare professional.
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.
If you want to see evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.
This is a summary of what we found:
Is the service safe?
People who used the service told us that they felt safe and staff were friendly. We saw staff interact with people who used the service in a respectful manner. The two social workers and a healthcare professional told us that they were confident people were safe.
Staff understood their role in safeguarding the people whom they supported and they understood the whistleblowing policy.
The home had systems in place to identify assess and manage risks relating to the health, welfare and safety of people who used the service.
Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities and felt well supported by management staff. The management team had systems in place to keep staffing levels under review and to provide extra staff promptly when needed. Staffing numbers and skill mix met people's needs. Healthcare and social care professionals we spoke with told us that they felt that staff were competent and they understood people's varied and complex needs.
The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which applies to care homes. Management staff knew when an application for deprivation of liberty would need to be submitted for authorisation.
Arrangements were in place for managing medicines safely.
Checks of the premises and other health and safety checks were carried out.
Is the service effective?
People told us that they were happy living in the home and received the care and support that they wanted and needed. Comments from people about the staff included 'They are helpful,' 'Staff are ok, they listen' and 'If I feel like talking I talk to them.'
Staff told us that they were well supported by management staff and there was good communication amongst staff about the service and people's needs, so that they could carry out their roles effectively in providing the care and support people needed. Staff were knowledgeable regarding how to care for people with mental healthcare needs.
People's care needs had been assessed and care and treatment were planned and delivered in a way that promoted people's safety and welfare. Risk assessments had been carried out where necessary. Care plans had been regularly reviewed with participation from the people who used the service.
Is the service caring?
We saw that people were supported by kind, attentive staff who approached people in a friendly manner. People who used the service told us they were happy with the staff and confirmed that they were approachable and listened to them. We saw people approach staff without hesitation and spoke with them freely. Staff provided support to people when they requested it and involved them in decisions about their care.
Staff were knowledgeable regarding the specific care needs of people and respected the choices that people made. People's privacy and dignity were respected. Healthcare and social care professionals we spoke with told us that people were well cared for and received the support that they needed.
Staff had an understanding of people's cultural and religious needs and where appropriate, arrangements had been made to meet these needs. People took part in activities of their choice.
Is the service responsive?
People were supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care and support. People told us that they were listened to. Staff responded promptly to issues to do with people's behaviour and care needs. They frequently met with people to discuss their individual care and support needs. People's care and health were monitored closely.
People's health, safety and welfare were protected as they received the advice and treatment that they needed from a range of health and social care professionals. Healthcare and social care professionals we spoke with told us that they were kept informed of people's progress.
People who used the service told us that if they had any concerns or complaints they would feel comfortable raising them with staff. There was an effective complaints system in use at the service, which helped ensure that people had their comments and complaints listened to and acted on.
Is the service well-led?
The home had an experienced registered manager who was supported by other management staff including a general manager who visited the home at least daily and who carried out monitoring checks of the quality of the service. These included checks of the care provided to people and the quality of environment. Improvements were made when needed.
Staff meetings took place regularly so staff views about the service were taken into account.
Incidents were recorded and relevant agencies including the Care Quality Commission, local authority and police were notified when required. Action was taken so that staff learnt from incidents and complaints.