Cherrydale is a care home which provides accommodation for up to 22 older people who require personal care. At the time of the inspection 20 people were using the service. Some of the people who lived at the service needed care and support due to dementia, sensory and /or physical disabilities.

There was a registered manager at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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.

We inspected Cherrydale on 30 November 2016. The inspection was unannounced. The service was last inspected in December 2013 when it was found to be meeting the requirements of the regulations.

People told us they felt safe at the service and with the staff who supported them. For example, we were told, “Yes I feel safe here,” and a health professional said the community nurse team were, “Quite happy with the home…We have never discussed there being problems with the home.”

People told us they received their medicines on time. Medicines administration records were kept appropriately and medicines were stored and managed to a good standard.

Staff had been suitably trained to recognise potential signs of abuse. Staff told us they would be confident to report concerns to management, and thought management would deal with any issues appropriately.

Staff training was delivered to a good standard, and staff received updates about important skills such as moving and handling at regular intervals. Staff also received training about the needs of people with dementia.

Recruitment processes were satisfactory as pre-employment checks had been completed to help ensure people’s safety. This included written references and an enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service check, which helped find out if a person was suitable to work with vulnerable adults.

People had access to medical professionals such as a general practitioner, dentist, chiropodist and an optician. People said they received enough support from these professionals. Health professionals were positive about care at the service for example we were told, “I feel that the staff at Cherrydale are very caring and the patients seem well cared for and happy in their home. I do not have any worries about my patients who are living there and would be happy to send one of my relatives there.”

There were enough staff on duty and people said they received timely support from staff when it was needed. People said call bells were answered promptly and we observed staff being attentive to people’s needs.

Care was provided appropriately and staff were viewed as caring. For example, we were told; “They provide excellent care. I have never had any grounds for concern,” “(My relative) is always nicely dressed, and her hair is brushed,” and “I am really pleased with it. They are so wonderful with the residents.”

The service had some activities organised. These activities included activities such as board games, keep fit, craft activities and some people had recently attended a church coffee morning.

Care files contained information such as a care plan and these were regularly reviewed. The service had appropriate systems in place to assess people’s capacity in line with legislation and guidance, for example using the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

People were happy with their meals. Everyone said they always had enough to eat and drink. People said they were provided with a choice of meals. People said they received enough support when they needed help with eating or drinking.

People we spoke with said if they had any concerns or complaints they would feel confident discussing these with staff members or management, or they would ask their relative to resolve the problem. They were sure the correct action would be taken if they made a complaint.

People felt the service was wel

Risks to people's health and welfare were assessed and care was planned and delivered according to people's needs.

People who lived at the home received care, treatment and support from staff that were competent to carry out their role. People spoken with told us they were well looked after. One person said “"My needs are always being assessed. The staff are so attentive."

Infection control practices had improved and people were cared for in a clean and hygienic environment. People told us the home was clean. One person said “The hygiene levels here are very good. Staff always wear their gloves and aprons when they help me to wash and dress”.

The management of medicines was robust and protected people from harm.

People were protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment because there was enough equipment to promote independence and comfort of people who used the service.

People were cared for by staff that were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. The provider’s statement of purpose was current and kept under review.

Many of the people at Cherrydale had dementia and were unable to tell us about their experiences. To help us to understand the experiences of people we used our SOFI (Short Observational Framework for Inspection) tool. The SOFI tool enabled us to spend time watching what was happening in the service and helped us to record how people spent their time, the type of support they received and whether they had positive experiences. We spent most of our time at the home observing care in the lounge rooms and the adjoining dining area and found that people had positive experiences.

People told us the staff were lovely, they were very kind and caring". Relatives told us the care provided at the home was very good and their relatives were well looked after.

People who could express a view told us they enjoyed the food, and that if they did not like what was on the menu, the cook would provide an alternative. Family members spoken with told us that their relative always enjoyed the food provided at the home

The arrangements in place for the control of infection was poor people and others were at risk of harm. Tablets of soap and cloth towels were being used in many areas of the home.

People were given support by the provider to make a comment or complaint where they needed assistance.

People who used the service told us they were involved in the planning of their care; that their care worker discussed their support options and treatments with them and their family. Matters of personal care and hygiene and of overall wellbeing had been discussed with them. They told us they attended review meetings often to discuss their needs and progress.

Some people told us they were self caring and only needed help with their medication. They said they were provided with the service user guide, and a contract of residency outlining costs and services which either they or their relatives signed.

Some people told us they could not remember if they had an assessment prior to being admitted into the service. Some people said someone from the service came to see them and asked a lot of questions, which they and their relatives answered.

People said they felt safe in the service and they knew whom to speak to if they felt uncomfortable with a situation. Some people told us they would speak with the manager who would act on their behalf. Others told us they would speak with their relatives. They told us they had been provided with the service's service user's guide which contained information on keeping people safe, and how to make a complaint; but they have never had to use it.