We considered our inspection findings in order to answer the following questions;' Is the service safe?
' Is the service effective?
' Is the service caring?
' Is the service responsive?
' Is the service well-led?
Below is a summary of what we found.
Is the service safe?
The provider had systems in place that identified, assessed and managed risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others. We saw people's individual records had been reviewed and they included risk assessments which were updated as people's needs changed.
The staff we spoke to were all aware of the complaints, safeguarding and whistle blowing procedures. All of the staff said they would immediately report any concerns they had about poor practice and were confident these would be addressed.
We found the house was clean and people were protected by the systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. We saw staff were provided with appropriate training to equip them with the skills to meet people's needs.
There was no one who was subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard authorisation, but staff were aware of the recent Supreme Court judgement regarding what constituted a deprivation of liberty and had contacted the local authority to discuss the implications which this case had on the people that lived at the home.
Is the service effective?
There were systems in place to ensure people's health and care needs were assessed with them. We found they were involved in this process. We saw that specific care plans were in place for people with particular needs such as, specific medical needs.
Staff training was provided that took account of the needs of the people in the house. For example, we saw training in catheter care and administration of medicines had been provided.
People were supported to be able to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs and records were kept as necessary. There was a varied selection of food and people were consulted about what they wanted to eat.
Is the service caring?
We saw staff responded kindly and respectfully to requests from people. There was a relaxed atmosphere and we saw there was a good rapport between people and staff. One relative told us they were satisfied with the care and support offered. They said, 'Staff keep in touch with me and I see them most weekends. I have been happy with the care provided.'
People's preferences, interests, and diverse needs were recorded and we saw staff were aware of these during the inspection.
Is the service responsive?
We saw evidence that the care staff identified changes in people's needs and acted to make sure they received the care they needed. For example, there was evidence that staff had acted promptly to inform the GP of concerns about someone's specific health care needs and a referral had been made to a consultant.
People told us they were aware of the complaints procedure and staff could describe how they would assist a person to make a complaint. We saw there were systems in place for dealing with and recording complaints.
Is the service well led?
The service had a quality assurance system in place that included the use of questionnaires for people who used the service and their relatives. This meant people were able to feed back on their experience and the service was able to learn from this.
Staff had regular supervision and staff meetings which meant they were able to feedback to the management of the home their views and suggestions. Appraisals were scheduled to take place. Staff we spoke with confirmed their views were listened and account was taken of them. They said they felt well supported by the management of the home.
We found risk assessments were in place for the house and people's care.
At the time of our visit no complaints had been received and no safeguarding referrals had been made.