Archived: Pinehurst

Is the service safe?

People told us that they felt safe living at the home. One person said 'I feel safe enough.'

The service followed the local authority safeguarding procedure and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to improve.

The home had suitable policies and procedures and training in place in relation to safeguarding, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and accompanying Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This legislation protects the human rights of adults who live in a care home or hospital and lack capacity to consent to arrangements proposed for their care or treatment and for whom such arrangements amount to deprivation of liberty. DoLS are not used for people detained or liable to be detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended by the Mental Health Act 2007). At the time of our inspection no one living at the home was subject to such an application. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and in how to submit one. This means that people will be safeguarded as required.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. People told us they had the opportunity to be involved in writing their care plans and they reflected their current needs.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. One person told us that care staff were 'very kind and good'. Another person said 'The care here is wonderful but there's not enough of them.' Staff completed training in person centred support. We saw that support workers explained care and encouraged independence when supporting people.

People's preferences and needs had been recorded. Care and support had been provided according to people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People participated in a range of activities inside the service regularly. Some people accessed the community with support and independently.

People knew how to raise concerns or make a complaint if they were unhappy. One person told us that, if they were unhappy about anything, 'I'd go straight to the manager. I'd voice concerns with the carer.'

People who used the service, their relatives and representatives completed an annual satisfaction survey.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked in collaboration with other professionals and services to ensure that people received effective care.

The service had a quality assurance system. Records we reviewed showed that identified issues were addressed. As a result the quality of the service improved.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of their roles. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service.

People who used the service told us they were satisfied with the service they received. People felt the staff supported them and met their needs. One person who used the service said "Everything is top class."

People told us that staff treated them with dignity and respect. One person told us 'It's my home and the staff treat it as such.' We saw staff speaking and responding to people in a kind and respectful manner.

The care records showed us that people's health needs had been assessed before they came to live in the home. These records included information from health and social care professionals which helped ensure people got the care and treatment they needed.

Recruitment records showed that new staff had been checked to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. The home trained their staff and had the procedures which protected people from any form of abuse. People told us they did not have any complaints but would speak to the manger or staff if they had any concerns. One person said 'I would go to the manager or her deputy, that's obvious.'

The service and the building were monitored and risk assessed to ensure they were suitable for the people who used them.

The evidence we collected showed us the service kept people safe and met their care needs.