Southlands Care Home

The inspection took place on 3 and 14 August 2017 and day one was unannounced. We told the provider we would be visiting on day two. At the last inspection in March 2015, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Staff worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act in every aspect of their work with people. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Leadership of the home was positive and this had driven, developed and maintained a positive culture where people and staff felt they were listened to and fully involved in developing and shaping the service. The quality of the service was assessed regularly and improvements were made where required. A lessons learned approach was taken which meant the team worked together to continuously improve. This approach had seen the service consistently deliver good levels of care for people and people confirmed this to us.

We saw that people were safe. People and their relatives confirmed this. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and were aware of types of abuse and how to report incidents. They knew the people they supported extremely well which resulted in people feeling safe and behaving in a confident way around staff.

There were robust recruitment processes in place to assist the registered manager in making safe decisions about who they employed. Staffing levels were safe and ensured people's needs were met. Work was currently underway to ensure call bells were responded to quickly and in a timely manner.

Staff received a thorough induction when they started work at the service which gave them the skills and knowledge to care for people. They were supported through supervision and appraisal.

People's medicines were managed safely. Risks to people's health and safety had been identified and detailed risk assessments and management plans were in place to guide staff. These were linked to people's care plans.

People's nutritional needs were identified and supported by staff. Where further input was required by healthcare professionals the staff had requested referrals.

The environment supported people's needs and their personal space reflected their preferences and personalities. Specialist equipment was checked regularly to ensure it was safe. Regular servicing of equipment and checks of services such as gas, electric and water took place.

We saw that people mattered to staff and staff respected their privacy and dignity. People's preferences were taken account of when planning their care and they could choose how that care was delivered. Work to record people's preferences in their care plan had started. People had access to a wide range of activities to promote wellbeing and, development of activities for people cared for in bed had been initiated.

Complaints were managed effectively and people felt they could raise concerns and they would be listened to. Compliments reflected our findings.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found