This inspection took place on 21 December 2016 and was unannounced. Claybourne is a care service for people who have a variety of support needs, such as older people and people with dementia. There were 44 people receiving a service at the time of the inspection.

There was 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.

People told us they felt safe and we saw risk assessments and plans had been put in place to keep people safe. When an incident had occurred, action had been taken to protect the person and to reduce the likelihood of another incident occurring. Appropriate moving and handling techniques were being used to help people mobilise.

Medicines were stored and managed safely. There was clear guidance available for staff to follow and checks were made to ensure people were receiving their medicine as prescribed. PRN protocols were also in place for people that needed their medicine ‘as and when required’.

There were appropriate amounts of staff to care for people and people did not have to wait for support. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse and referrals had been made if there had been an incident.

Safe recruitment practices were in place and staff had appropriate checks prior to starting work to ensure they were suitable to work with people who use the service.

Checks were made on the building itself to ensure it remained safe for people to live there.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being followed. Mental capacity assessments were being carried out and when people did not have capacity decisions were made and recorded in their best interest. Evidence had been sought to verify that representatives had Lasting Power of Attorney.

Appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding referrals had been made to ensure people were not being unlawfully deprived.

Staff had sufficient training to support people effectively and staff were able to refresh this training when required.

People had access to other health professionals in order to maintain their health and wellbeing.

People were supported to have food and drinks of their choice that were appropriate for their needs.

People felt staff were caring and that they were treated with dignity and respect, and people were encouraged to maintain as much independence as possible. People were offered choices and these choices were respected. Visitors were able to visit at a time convenient for them and people could decorate their rooms so they could have personalised space.

Care plans contained good personal detail so that staff could get to know the people they supported and people had their preferences documented and catered for where possible. People and family were involved in reviews and when people’s needs had changed plans had been updated.

People were encouraged to partake in activities that interested them and staff were able to support people with this. People’s spiritual needs were taken into consideration and people were able to access spiritual support.

People and relatives were encouraged to provide feedback or complain if they needed to and it was recorded that this feedback was acted upon. We saw that complaints were recorded, investigated and responded to.

Effective quality monitoring systems were in place. Care files and associated documentation was audited and action was taken when omissions had been identified.

Staff all felt they could approach the registered manager and management team. There was an open door policy and staff all said they could raise things if necessary.

The registered manager felt supported by the provider and had submitted

During this inspection we looked at how care and support was provided to 45 people with dementia. We spoke with the majority of people who used the service. We spoke with people who used the service, relatives, members of staff and the managers. We observed the care of people who were unable to speak with us because their dementia affected their ability to recall or communicate.

Plans of care identified the support people needed. They gave information about the way people expressed their wishes and the help people needed to make decisions about their care. Assessments were completed when potential risks to people were identified. The action needed to reduce the risk being clearly documented.

The staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of the people's needs and the support they required. We saw staff recognised people's rights and were respectful to people that required assistance.

We observed that interaction between people who used the service and staff was very good. Conversations were initiated by people who used the service in many cases, all of whom appeared to recognise and feel comfortable talking with members of staff and management.

Relatives we spoke with told us the care and support provided was ‘very good’. One person said: "The staff here are great, I’ve been very impressed. They have a ‘can-do’ attitude”.

We saw the service had systems in place to effectively monitor, assess and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.

The inspection was carried out over two days and we spoke with four visitors, the manager of the service, the peripatetic manager and seven other staff members.

We observed that staff were aware of people's individual needs and were attentive and caring. Staff were also aware of how each person communicated and their choices and preferences. Staff felt supported with their training needs. One person said, "It's very good here with training."

People received care as individuals and their choices and preferences were taken into account.

There was a good programme of entertainment within the home and people were enabled to participate in activities and events. This created a friendly atmosphere where visitors felt welcome and included. One person told us, "I love coming here you always feel welcome and get involved."

The service was supported by various health care professionals and we met with a visiting doctor and district nurse. People received good health care and support and were able to stay at the home until the end of their lives.

We were informed about a recent inspection by a local involvement network group. This had been a positive inspection with just a few points of recommendation.

The registered manager was in the process of leaving and moving on to another home for the same provider. The peripatetic manager was present throughout the inspection and she was taking over management of the home until a new permanent manager could be employed.

People using the service and their relatives told us about the many external visits they had made and enjoyed. They mentioned visiting Blackpool, Ammerton Farm, pubs for meals, Trentham Gardens and choral and brass-band concerts. This reflected an active programme of external visits for people who wished to be involved.

A relative told us how music and reminiscence therapy had improved the quality of life for a person using the service.

The Chaplain told us about her weekly involvement with the home and the positive responses from people using the service.

A relative told us that the family were involved in care planning and reviews.

One person told us "When I go to bed staff are really good, they settle me down and make me feel safe"

Another person told us "Staff are really kind and help us".

Staff told us that a wide range of training opportunities were available to them and they welcomed training as a way of improving their knowledge and the quality of the service they provide.

People using the service and several visitors told us that they were highly satisfied with the quality of the service and were particularly complimentary about the commitment and support of staff.