The inspection took place on 7 February 2017 and was unannounced. The home was previously inspected in October 2015 and the service was meeting the regulations we looked at.

Cherry Trees is situated in the Kimberworth Park area of Rotherham. The service provides accommodation for up to 66 people who require personal care. The home has four units, one of which was closed at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager in post at the time of 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.

The management team consisted of the registered manager who was supported by a deputy manager and a team of senior care workers. We spoke with staff who felt supported by the management team. There was evidence of good leadership at all levels. Staff knew their roles and responsibilities and when to pass something on to the senior care worker.

We spoke with staff about safeguarding people from abuse and they were very knowledgeable about this. They knew how to report any concerns and were confident that appropriate action would be taken.

We looked at systems in place to manage medicines and found that they were safe.

We looked at staff recruitment files and found the provider had a safe and effective system in place for employing new staff. Satisfactory pre-employment checks had to be received prior to the person starting work at the service.

Care plans we looked at identified any risks associated with people’s care. Plans of care were put in place to reduce the risk from occurring.

We spoke with staff who said they received appropriate training which gave them the skills and confidence to carry out their responsibilities. They found training valuable and worthwhile.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were offered a choice of food at each meal and drinks and snacks were provided throughout the day in line with their preferences and dietary requirements.

We looked at care records and found that referrals were made where appropriate and that staff acted on the advice given.

People we spoke with all told us that staff promoted their independence by helping them to make decisions about their daily routine and what they wanted to do. People felt that staff chatted with them and felt they were listened to and that their opinions mattered.

During our inspection we observed staff interacting with people who used the service. We saw that staff had developed positive, caring relationships with people based on their individual preferences and choices. It was evident that staff knew people very well.

We looked at care records and found they were informative and reflected the care and support being given.

The service employed two activity co-ordinators who were available over seven days a week and provided social stimulation to people.

The service had a complaints procedure and people felt at ease to raise concerns. People we spoke with felt their concerns would be listened to and addressed satisfactory.

People told us the registered manager was supportive and there was a good leadership structure in place.

We saw regular audits took place to check the quality of service provision.

People were involved in the service and their views were sought.