We visited this service and talked to people to gain a balanced overview of what they experienced, what they thought and how they were cared for and supported. We spoke with two relatives; we met the four people that lived there, four staff members and the registered manager. All the people that used the service had limited verbal communication skills so we observed their interactions with staff and their body language to understand their view of the support they received. We considered all of the evidence that we had gathered under the outcomes that we inspected. We used that information to answer the five questions that we always ask;
' Is the service caring?
' Is the service responsive?
' Is the service safe?
' Is the service effective?
' Is the service well led?
Is the service safe ?
We observed that people were treated with dignity and respect by the care staff. We saw that people were given choice in their care. A relative that we spoke with told us that they were very happy with the care at the home. They told us, "We have been very happy with the care and feel that X is safe living at the home".
We spoke with staff and the registered manager about Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This applies to all care homes. The registered manager told us that there had been no applications and told us that they knew what to do if an application needed to be made. Training records looked at confirmed that all staff had received DoLS training.
The service was clean, hygienic and safe. The home had an infection control policy in place. Equipment was maintained and serviced so preventing any unnecessary risks.
We saw that systems were not well established to make sure that learning took place from accidents and incidents. We found that some records had not been accurately maintained which could place people at risk of harm. We have therefore asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law to ensure the service is safe.
Is the service effective ?
A relative we spoke with confirmed that they could visit throughout the day. We saw that facilities were available so people could meet in private if they wanted to. We saw that relatives were involved with people's care. A relative told us, "The staff keep me informed about their care".
Referrals had been made to external professionals so people got the support they needed to maintain their health and wellbeing.
Staff had received the training they needed to ensure that they continued to maintain their skills and knowledge to care for people effectively.
Is the service caring?
We saw that staff treated people with dignity and respect. We saw that staff were patient and caring they took their time and did not rush people. We saw that people responded positively to staff.
We found that people's preferences, interest and aspirations and diverse needs had mostly been reflected in their care records.
Is the service responsive?
We saw that people were supported to take part in a range of activities at home and in the local community. We saw that staff responded to spontaneous requests from people to do activities, or to spend their time in a way that they preferred.
We saw that when needed staff had requested the involvement of other health professionals in people's care.
Is the service well lead?
The home had a manager who was registered with us, CQC. They were experienced and knowledgeable about the needs of the people that lived in the home.
Staff that we spoke with were clear about their role and responsibilities.
We found that systems in place to regularly assess the quality of the service that people received had not always been timely or effective. We have therefore asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law so that the service is well lead.