Shining Star

People were kept safe. Medicines were managed in a safe way; people's medicines folders were up to date and audited correctly. Infection control practice had improved since our last inspection; the service followed national guidance and sought to keep people safe from infection. There were systems in place to protect people from abuse. People's risks were assessed and monitored. There were enough staff working at the service and recruitment processes were robust. Lessons were learned when things went wrong as incidents were recorded and actions completed to keep people safe.

The service worked effectively. People were supported to eat, drink and maintain healthy diets. 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. Deprivation of Liberties Safeguard documentation was up to date. People's choices were respected, and decisions made in their best interests. People's needs were assessed in line with the law, so the service knew whether they could meet their needs. Staff received induction and training, so they knew how to work effectively with people. Staff were supported in their role through one to one supervision. Staff communicated effectively with other agencies to ensure people received good care, this included health care. The provider had adapted the building to ensure it met people's needs and people could decorate their rooms as they saw fit.

The service was caring. A relative told us staff were caring. People were supported to express their views in key work sessions. People's privacy and dignity were respected, and their independence promoted.

The service was responsive. Care plans were person-centred focusing on people's needs and preferences.

People's communication needs were met. People were able to take part in activities they could enjoy. There was a complaint process where people or relatives could complain and when they did, the provider responded appropriately. People's end of life wishes were recorded.

The service was well led. Record keeping at the service had improved since our last inspection and documents we viewed were up to date. Quality assurance measures were appropriate and working to ensure care remained good and people were safe. The manager was thought of highly by staff, as well as the relative and advocate we spoke to. The manager understood duty of candour and fulfilled the service's regulatory requirements. People, relatives and staff were able to be engaged with the service should they choose to be. The service worked with other agencies to the benefit of people using the service.