Our inspection team was made up of one inspector. We answered our five 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 have found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection. There were two people who used the service. We used a number of different methods to help us understand the views of these people, who had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us about their experiences. We observed the care provided, looked at supporting care documentation, staff records and records relating to the management of the service. The registered manager had left the service. A new manager had been appointed who showed us an application had been submitted to the CQC to register a new manager. We spoke with the manager, two care workers (one of whom was one of the providers bank staff), a relative for one of the people who used the service,and an advocate for the other.
Is the service safe?
People were treated with respect and dignity by the care workers. People told us their relative or friend was safe in the service. One commented, 'Definitely.' Staff had received training and had an understanding of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). They knew who to contact should further guidance and support be required to ensure people's best interests. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and in how to submit one. This meant that people were being safeguarded as required.
There was a system in place to make sure that the provider, manager and care workers learnt from events such as incidents and accidents, complaints, and concerns.
Staff had been provided with training to undertake their roles in the service, systems developed and recording and monitoring systems put in place. This helped to ensure people were not put at any unnecessary risk.
A staff rota was in place, which had taken into account people's care needs when making decisions about the numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required. This helped to ensure that people's needs were met.
Is the service effective?
People's health and care needs had been reviewed and where possible people and their representatives had been involved in the writing and review of the care documentation. Their specialist care needs such as dietary requirements and behavioural support needs had been identified and guidance for staff to follow was in place. People were able to move around the service freely and safely.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and offered encouragement when supporting people. The relative and advocate we spoke with told us, '*** (name) likes routine. They manage this well,' 'I like the way *** (name) is treated. I am very happy with the care there,' and ' We can't really fault the service.'
The relative and advocate told us had they been involved with the service and had been asked to complete quality assurance satisfaction surveys.
People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded. Both the relative and advocate told us care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.
Is the service responsive?
People regularly completed a range of activities in and outside of the service.
There was a complaints policy and procedure in place if people or their representatives were unhappy, which was monitored by the provider. No complaints had been received since the last inspection. The relative and advocate told us they had not had to raise any concerns. They were aware who to speak with if they had any concerns and they felt they would be listened to. People could therefore be assured that complaints were investigated and action taken as necessary.
Is the service well lead?
The service had a quality assurance system, and records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continually improving.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the service and quality assurance processes were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all time.