One inspector visited the home and answered our five 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. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with four people using the service, their relatives, three staff, the manager and the provider. We reviewed seven care plans, three recruitment files and other relevant records. Additionally we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) observation for a sixty minute period. SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us to understand the experience of people who could not,clearly, tell us about it.
Is the service safe?
Care plans instructed staff how to meet people’s needs in a way which minimised risk for the individual. They were detailed and ensured staff cared for people in a safe way.
CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. We found that the home liaised effectively with the local authority DoLS team and had made applications as appropriate. The home had made one DoLS referral in 2014.
We found that medication was administered and recorded in a way which kept people as safe as possible. Staff were properly trained and their competence to administer medicines was checked regularly.
The home had robust recruitment procedures and checked, as far as possible, that candidates were safe and suitable to work with vulnerable people. People told us they had never experienced any poor treatment and felt safe in the home. The home referred staff to the appropriate bodies if they were not fit to work with vulnerable people.
Systems were in place to make sure that the manager and staff continually monitored the quality and safety of care offered to people.
Health and safety was taken seriously by the home and all the appropriate safety checks had been completed. This reduced the risks to the people who lived in the home, staff and visitors.
Effective?
One person, who reflected the views of others said: ‘‘I can’t fault them, they’re all very, very kind’’. The four people we spoke with told us they were happy living in the home and felt all their needs were met. A relative told us that the home met their relative’s needs extremely well.
People’s health and care needs were assessed with them, and/or their relatives, as appropriate. Care plans were detailed and clearly identified people’s needs and how they should be met. They were reviewed regularly and changes were made to meet people’s changing needs. We saw that staff gave support as described in individual’s care plans.
Caring?
People were supported by kind, caring and patient staff. We saw that care staff were attentive, encouraging and positive. They responded appropriately to people’s needs. Staff communicated with people at all times and encouraged interactions between people using the service.
People's diversity, values and human rights were respected. Care plans were individualised and person –centred. We saw that people were treated with respect and dignity by the staff.
Responsive?
We saw that health care was sought in a timely way and special plans of care were put in place to ensure people received any necessary short term additional care.
The home had made changes and improvements as a result of ideas and discussions with people who lived in the home and their relatives.
The home had received one complaint in the previous eight months. This was dealt with appropriately and actions taken, as necessary. A relative told us that any concern raised, however small, gets an immediate response.
Well led?
Staff members told us that they were supported to do their job well. They said that they felt valued and their views were listened to. People who lived in the home and their relatives told us that staff and the manager were very approachable, as was the provider who visited regularly.
The service had a comprehensive quality assurance system. We saw records which showed that identified shortfalls and ideas people put forward were addressed. Several examples of changes made as a result of the regular satisfaction surveys were provided by relatives and the manager. As a result the quality of the service was being maintained or improved.