Cherry Trees

People and relatives were complimentary about the service they or their relative received. Relatives told us, management, communication and feeling more involved in their family members care had improved and the quality of care.

People were safe because staff were recruited safely. People said they were safe because staff made regular checks on them or if they had a change in health, support was provided. Staff and the provider knew how to keep people safe and protected from abusive practice. Systems to learn lessons when things went wrong helped to drive improvements and the registered manager notified us and the relevant body at the right times.

People said staff were kind, caring, gentle and always willing to do what was needed and expected of them. People were cared for by staff who attended training relevant to their roles. Assessments were completed before care was provided. This helped to ensure staff had the relevant skills and knowledge to meet a person's needs. Some staff said recent admissions and a lack of information upon admission, though not their fault, did cause additional pressures on the staff team before they got to know the person.

Staff followed infection control procedures in line with national guidance for reducing the spread of COVID- 19. Regular cleaning took place; however, we found some communal dining rooms would benefit from further cleaning and checks to ensure standards were maintained.

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.

People's plans of care were detailed helping staff to provide safe care. Staff's knowledge of how to support people was consistent with people's care records and what people told us. Staff said there was limited or no reliance on agency staff, which meant the staff team worked well together because their knew people and their preferred routines.

Risks related to people's care were recorded and reviewed. There were instructions for staff to follow to manage those identified risks. however, some risk assessments, such as those relating to specialist equipment, required more detail to be fully personalised. The registered manager assured us this would be addressed, conversations with staff showed they knew how to manage risk. In some examples, intervention by a GP or occupational therapist had been sought to help keep people safe.

Regular audits and quality checks were completed with oversight through internal compliance checks. People and staff were complimentary of the management team. Relatives we spoke with confirmed the quality of care was much better than when we last inspected in 2019. Relatives said the management team was approachable and responsive.