Orchard View

The service was safe and has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

Medicines were managed safely. Systems were followed to keep people free from harm and abuse. Incidents were reported, investigated and lessons learned. Care plans were detailed and supported staff to manage any risks whilst meeting people’s needs.

The service was effective and has been rated good. The provider had effective systems and processes in place to recognise people's changing health and care needs and act on these in a timely manner to keep people safe. People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. Staff told us how important it was for them to support people to live their lives as independently as possible. Staff told us they took time to speak with people and get to know them, this was something we observed during the assessment. Visiting professionals gave feedback in relation to positive relationships between staff and people. One visiting professional said, "I have always found communication from the care home to be very good and they keep me updated on day-to-day issues." Staff had received training around the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated code of practice. Staff understood the requirements of the MCA and appropriately applied for deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS). They completed capacity assessments and held ‘Best Interests’ meetings with multidisciplinary teams, as needed.

The service was caring and has been rated good. This meant people were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff understood person-centered care and demonstrated how people were given choice and control in their lives. Staff and management knew and understood the people they supported, including their preferences, wishes, personal histories and backgrounds.

The service was responsive and has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. People and relatives told us staff knew them well and care and support was personalised and responsive to people’s needs and interests.

Care planning was person-centred and reflected peoples physical, mental, emotional and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act.

The manager and staff ensured everyone could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The systems in place made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

The service was well-led and has been rated good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care. Leaders were capable, transparent and compassionate and were well thought of by people and staff alike.

A new manager was in place and had made improvements to the service. Staff told us they were better supported since the new manager had started. They told us, they were confident the leadership team were committed to delivering a good quality service and promoted a supportive and open culture. The provider had a range of quality assurance processes in place, and these were working effectively.