The inspection was carried out by a single inspector who was accompanied by an expert by experience. During our inspection we asked the provider, staff and people who used the service specific questions; is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection and speaking with people using 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?
People told us they were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. They said they felt safe. We found safeguarding procedures to be robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported.
Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.
The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. We also found relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one. This meant people were safeguarded as required.
The service was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment was well maintained and serviced regularly therefore not putting people at unnecessary risk.
The registered manager set the staff rotas, they told us they took people's care needs into account when making decisions about the staffing numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required. This helped to ensure that people's needs were met.
Is the service effective?
There was an advocacy service available if people needed it, this meant people could access additional support when required.
People's health and care needs were fully assessed with them, and they or their representatives were fully involved in writing their plans of care.
Specialist dietary, social, mobility, equipment and dementia care needs had been identified in care plans where required.
People's needs were taken into account with signage and the layout of the service enabling people to move around freely and safely. The premises had been sensitively adapted to meet the needs of people with physical, memory and mental health impairments.
People who used the service confirmed they were able to see people in private and that visiting times were flexible.
Is the service caring?
People told us they were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. People commented, 'The staff are very good. They put me at my ease,' 'This is a wonderful place to live. They look after me very well, there is a good choice of home cooked food. It's really nice here. 'I have a bell in my room. When I pull it the staff come quickly' and 'They the staff are very good. They would get the doctor quickly if I was unwell.' A relative told us that the care at St Marys Convent was excellent. Another told us, 'I couldn't fault the care my relative receives.'
People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised, we saw these had been addressed by the provider.
People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs were recorded and care and support was provided in accordance with people's wishes.
Is the service responsive?
People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly.
People we spoke with knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy.
Is the service well-led?
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 in place. The records we looked at showed any shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuingly improving. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service.
The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.