18 June 2014
During a routine inspection
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
We saw people who used the service treated with respect and dignity by the staff.
People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. The provider and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Although no DoLS applications had been made, staff were able to describe the circumstances when an application should be made and knew how to submit one.
Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt 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 provider had procedures in place to deal with emergencies to ensure the safety and welfare of the people who used the service.
The physical environment was well maintained and supported people's privacy and promoted independence and well-being. The premises were clear from clutter and areas were safe to walk around.
Is the service effective?
People's health and care needs were assessed with them and their relatives where possible and they were involved in discussing any changes to their care plan on a monthly basis. Any diverse needs such as use of equipment and dietary requirements had been identified in people's care plans.
All the staff we spoke with had undertaken relevant training to support the knowledge required to operate safe practices and meet people's needs.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. Feedback from people's relatives was extremely positive about the care given by the staff. A relative said, "If you ask for anything, it is always done."
People's preferences, interests, and life history had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.
Is the service responsive?
People engaged with a range of activities in and outside the service. People knew how to make a complaint if they were not happy. We looked at the complaints policy and saw that complaints were dealt with quickly. People received personalised care and were supported to express their views.
Is the service well-led?
Systems were in place to regularly monitor the quality and safety of the service. People who used the service were satisfied with the quality of the care they received. Staff, relatives and people who used the service felt involved in the service and contributed to how improvements could be made.