Pemberton Fold

The home has 4 separate units, or households, all with ensuite facilities. Each household operates as a self- contained unit with 15 bedrooms, communal areas such as a lounge, dining area and bathrooms, and a small satellite kitchen. The home also benefits from a hairdresser's salon, a large activities room and external gardens.

Not all risks associated with people's care were documented and managed in a way which kept them safe. There were enough staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. There were occasions when staffing levels might be lower, for example during instances of short notice unplanned staff absences, however, people we spoke with told us they felt safe.

Premises checks and all maintenance records were up to date. Required test and safety certificates were in place. Systems were in place to protect people from abuse and people told us they felt safe living at the home. The environment was spacious and dementia-friendly, although some outside garden areas were overgrown and potentially unsafe. A new contract was in place to address this.

Staff training was documented on a matrix, although some elements of refresher training were not up to date for all staff. Staff received relevant training to perform their roles and help meet people's needs. People's dietary needs were communicated to catering staff on admission into the home. People had mixed views on the food. Three people complained to us that the food wasn't always hot. As people's needs changed, referrals were made to relevant professionals for assessment and advice to ensure they could eat and drink safely.

Care plans were now electronic and did not always contain enough detail or reflect people's care preferences. People and their relatives were involved in care planning, but we were not assured this was reflected on electronic systems.

The team of activity co-ordinators had increased to 3. Activities had improved and the team encouraged people to become involved in both group and individual activities. The home benefited from a large activity room and grounds outside the home. End-of-life care provision was supportive and compassionate.

Since the last inspection there had been limited involvement and oversight from the provider. Audits had not been undertaken in line with company policy, nor had they been effective in identifying and resolving areas for improvement to ensure compliance with the regulations. The provider had not ensured staff were adequately trained and competent in using new electronic systems, and support with this had been delayed.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.