Pendle Brook Care Home

People's needs were not always fully assessed, and people's care plans did not always detail necessary information. Staff were supported through supervisions, though staff training was not fully up to date. We have made a recommendation about staff training. Feedback on meals indicated improvements were needed. Although the home was purpose built, the environment could be improved for people living with dementia. Oral healthcare plans were in place and the home was registered with a dental hygienist. The service worked in partnership with a variety of health care professionals.

People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. Although the policies and systems in the service supported this practice and necessary DoLS referrals were being made, best interest decisions were not always in place. We made a recommendation the provider ensures they follow best interests' guidance.

People's equality, diversity and dignity was respected. The service used an electronic care plan system to record people's details on. People and their relatives were able to express their views. Surveys were being completed to gather feedback and people were able to access advocacy if required.

Records relating to people's care were not always person centred, but people were able to make everyday choices. There was a complaints policy and procedure in place and a complaints log was being maintained. At the time of the inspection no one was in receipt of end of life care. People's communication needs were being met. An activities coordinator was employed by the provider who led on a variety of activities for people living in the home.

Quality assurance systems needed further improvement. Various documents were either not completed, not in place, not up-to date or not accurate and audits carried out by the manager did not always identify the

issues we found at this inspection. Staff were aware of how to report poor practice and there was a procedure in place to support this. Feedback about the manager was positive. The manager reported necessary incidents to appropriate organisations and lessons were learned. Meetings for staff and people that use the service were taking place, and relatives were kept up to date via telephone, email and through social media. Surveys were available for staff, people and their relatives to complete.