Pegasus Care – Beeches

The provider is also registered to provide a supported living service. At the time of the inspection 7 people were supported to live independently in their own homes. Some of these people lived with other people in 'shared homes' and received 24 hour staff support.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

Right Support: Staff supported people with their medicines, however records needed improving to ensure the number of medicines at the care home was recorded accurately and checked to confirm people had their medicines when they needed them. Risks to people were not always properly assessed and recorded to explain why people may not be able to use certain parts of the home for their safety. People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their needs. However, care plans and risk assessments were not always detailed and reflected people's aspirations, goals and development of life skills. The registered manager was responsive to our feedback and took action to address the issues identified.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Pegasus Care home does not fully meet the current guidance on small, ordinary homes forming part of a local community. However Pegasus Care home was close to local amenities and people regularly accessed local facilities.

Right Care: Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity. Staff understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse. The service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it. Staff promoted equality and diversity in their

support for people. They understood people's cultural needs and provided culturally appropriate care.

Right Culture: Improvements were needed to the current systems to make them more effective to monitor the quality of the service and drive improvement. Staff turnover was very low, which supported people to receive consistent care from staff who knew them well. People and those important to them, including advocates, were involved in planning their care. The registered manager was open and transparent throughout our inspection and demonstrated a commitment to delivering improvements and achieving best outcomes for people. They acted on queries and our feedback throughout the inspection.