Beechdale

This inspection visit took place on 27 September 2018 and was announced.

At our last inspection in November 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection

People who lived at Beechdale and relatives told us they were safe, cared for and looked after well. A relative said, "We completely feel my [relative] is safe and well at Beechdale."

We observed many examples of staff being compassionate, kind and respectful to people they supported. This was confirmed by our observations and relatives we spoke with. A relative said, "The manager and staff are so caring everything revolves around the residents."

Procedures were in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.

People who lived at Beechdale received their medicines as required. Care records we looked at contained a medicines care plan and risk assessment to inform staff about medication details for each individual. Training was provided for staff to ensure they had the competency to administer medicines. This was confirmed by staff we spoke with.

The registered manager ensured there was sufficient staffing levels in place to provide support people required. People had one to one support to enable them to pursue activities of their choice.

The design of the building plus facilities provided were appropriate for people cared for at Beechdale. A relative said, "It works for the people cared for here, a lovely place."

The service had safe infection control procedures in place and staff had received infection control training.

Meal times were relaxed and organised around people's individual daily routines. People were able to choose what they wanted to eat and staff prepared meals.

People were supported to have access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care and when people were out in the community. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

Staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. They had skills, knowledge and experience required to support people to follow their interests and provide care they needed.

People had been 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.

The service had information about support from an external advocate should this be required by people they supported.

The service had a complaints procedure which was made available to people and their family when they commenced using the service. People we spoke with told us they were happy with the service and had no complaints.

The management team used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included, staff and 'service user' meetings in picture format. In addition, surveys were collected to seek relative/people's views about Beechdale.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found