Castle Dene

People were protected from avoidable harm; through assessment and management of the risks they faced day to day. Staff knew how to recognise concerns and reported them both within the home and to external organisations. Staff had the necessary experience and skills to provide care, and there were enough staff planned on duty. Medicines management was safe. Infection control procedures adhered to good practice guidelines. Utility checks and maintenance processes were in place to ensure people were safe. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty, and whether any conditions relating to those authorisations were being met.

People’s care and support needs were assessed. The home worked with external professionals and services to meet people’s needs. Healthcare needs were met, access to resources were available to support people to live healthier lives. People had enough to eat and drink and where there were concerns this was monitored. Consent was sought and people were involved in decisions about their health and wellbeing. If there was a concern a person lacked capacity to make individual decisions, an assessment was carried out in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

Staff were kind and caring. People and relatives told us staff knew them well and treated them with genuine affection. The home was bustling and full of life and fun, people were encouraged to make friends and interact if they wanted to. Staff were supported well by the registered manager and provider and therefore were happy in their work. The registered manager was clear in the view to achieve the best possible care, they must support their staff team. The registered manager and deputy manager worked well to support the team. Relatives were welcomed into the home and treated as family.

People were supported by staff who worked to achieve the best outcomes for them, working in partnership. The home worked to ensure everyone received information in the way they preferred, and alternatives were available. Barriers to communication were recorded and shared as required. Equality and diversity were considered, and the principles underpinned each policy and procedure within the home. Everybody’s views were sought and listened to in a formal and an informal way, for example. Opportunities for everyone to be included were varied and the home actively worked towards collaboration to ensure everyone’s voice was heard.

Leadership was visible within the home, feedback received during the assessment about the management team was positive, confident and reliable. Robust policies and procedures underpinned all processes to ensure safe operation. There was a strong connection with external professionals and partners to ensure people’s needs were met. Community links were established and there was an ongoing drive to develop these links further. People, their relatives and staff had confidence in the management of the home and felt involved in decisions. The registered manager had made all necessary notifications, referrals and information sharing as required.