Belong Crewe Care Village

Belong Crewe care village provides accommodation for up to 66 people who require nursing or personal care. At this inspection 65 people were living there some of whom were living with dementia. There were six separate households over three floors. These households were named Britannia, Coronation, Duke, Jubilee, Patriot and Royal Scott. Individual households were named after famous trains which built on the links to the Crewe railway network.

Belong Crewe was previously rated as good following our inspection on 7 September 2015. This rating was displayed in the reception area and also on the provider's website.

At this inspection we found the service was overall outstanding.

A registered manager was in post and present during our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People received excellent care from a staff team which was highly skilled, trained and motivated. The provider supported staff champions within the service who actively supported people to ensure they experienced good healthcare outcomes in areas such as dementia. Staff members had individualised development plans which capitalised on their skills to provide effective care for people. Staff members were actively encouraged by the provider to develop their professional skills and knowledge. People were supported with links with health and social care services which were excellent. Where people had complex and continued health needs staff sought to improve their care, treatment and support by identifying and implementing best practice. People benefited from receiving support in a place best suited to meet their physical and emotional needs. Belong Crewe had achieved recognised accreditation in a number of schemes including dementia and end of life.

People received support from staff who had an excellent understanding of their social and cultural diversity, values and beliefs that may have influenced their decisions on how they want to receive care, treatment and support.

People had positive and empowering relationships with those they lived with and those who supported them. People received emotional support and took strength from those around them. People were encouraged to further develop relationships that mattered and brought value to their lives.

Staff were excellent in enabling people to remain independent and had an in-depth appreciation of people's individual needs around privacy and dignity.

People's human rights were promoted by staff members who were aware of current guidance and legislation which directed their work. People were involved in decisions about their care and had information they needed in a way they understood.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to maintain good health. People's personal likes and preferences were known by the staff who supported them to make informed decisions regarding their diet.

People received support that was flexible and responsive to their individual needs and preferences. Staff and the management team sought creative ways to enable people to live as full a life as possible. People received person-centred care which achieved outstanding results. People took part in social activities, and where appropriate education and work, which was innovative and met people's individual needs, likes and aspirations.

People were safe as staff had been trained and understood how to support people in a way that protected them from danger, harm and abuse. People were supported by enough staff who were available to safely meet their needs. People had individual assessments of risk associated with their care. Staff knew what to do in order to minimise the potential for harm. The provider had systems in place to address any unsafe staff practice. This included additional training or disciplinary action if needed. The provider followed safe recruitment practices and completed checks on staff before they were allowed to start work.

The provider had an excellent track record of compliance. There was a very strong organisational commitment to developing services for the benefit of people. The provider and management team had a clear and accurate understanding of the service they provided and their aspirations for developing the quality of care people received. They had clear plans for development and improvement and involved community professionals and resources accordingly. They implemented initiatives and demonstrated best care practices by engaging a number of external professionals to expand on people's experiences. The provider undertook regular quality checks in order to drive improvements. The provider engaged people and encouraged feedback in a way that was open and transparent. People felt confident they were listened to and their views were valued.

We judged that the provider had made improvements to improve the quality of treatment and care to people who use the service. This evidence supported our judgement to improve the rating from 'Good' to 'Outstanding' overall during this inspection.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found