The Manor Cottage provides accommodation and personal care for up to 26 older people. At the time of our visit there were 24 people living at the service. This inspection was unannounced. This meant the provider did not know we would be visiting.The registered manager had left just prior to the inspection and a new manager had been deployed from one of the providers other homes where they had been working as a deputy. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
At our last comprehensive inspection in December 2015 the home was rated as good.
At this inspection we found the service had maintained an overall rating of good and they had been working hard to improve the service to provide some outstanding, kind, compassionate, care practices.
Why the service is rated good
People continued to receive a service that was safe. The manager and staff understood their role and responsibilities to keep people safe from harm. People were supported to take risks, promote their independence and follow their interests. Risks were assessed and plans put in place to keep people safe. There was enough staff to safely provide care and support to people. Checks were carried out on staff before they started work to assess their suitability to support vulnerable people. Medicines were well managed and people received their medicines as prescribed.
The service remained effective in meeting people’s needs. Staff received regular supervision and the training needed to meet people’s needs. Arrangements were made for people to see a GP and other healthcare professionals when they needed to do so. The registered manager and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and, worked to ensure people's rights were respected. People were supported to enjoy a healthy, nutritious, balanced diet whilst promoting and respecting choice.
We were introduced to people throughout our visits and they welcomed us. People were relaxed, comfortable and confident in their home. The feedback we received from people was positive throughout. Those people who used the service expressed great satisfaction and spoke highly of all staff. Comments received from relatives included; “It is a warm, clean comfortable home. The staff are always friendly and kind. They offer me lunch and drinks when I’m there. There are so many good things about the home” and, “The staff couldn’t do more for you, it’s an excellent home”.
Staff had a good awareness of individuals' needs and treated people in a warm and respectful manner. They were knowledgeable about people's lives before they started using the service. Every effort was made to enhance this knowledge so that their life experiences remained meaningful.
People were supported to maintain their personal interests and hobbies. It was evident that a person centred approach to care had been further enhanced since our previous inspection. One relative recently wrote in a survey, “Mum has always had excellent care and kindness shown to her. Staff go above and beyond the expected”.
The service was responsive to people’s needs. People received person centred care and support. Staff monitored and responded to changes in people’s needs. They were offered a range of activities both at the service and in the local community. People were encouraged to make their views known and the service responded by making changes.
People benefitted from a service that was well led. The provider, area manager, manager and staff team maintained a clear focus on continually seeking to improve the service people received. Comprehensive quality assurance systems were in place and based upon regular, scheduled audits which identified any action required to make improvements. This meant the quality of service people received was monitored on a regular basis and, where shortfalls were identified they were acted upon.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.