About the service: Dalling House is a residential care home that was providing personal care to 19 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. People living at the home had a range of care needs, including people living with dementia.

People’s experience of using this service:

• Risks to people and the environment were effectively managed though robust assessments and people were appropriately protected from the risk of abuse and avoidable harm.

• People and relatives told us they were happy with the care and support provided.

• People were supported to receive personalised care to meet their needs and care records were person-centred to reflect people’s likes, dislikes and preferences.

• People and relatives were involved in the planning and delivery of their care, and the registered manager sought regular feedback from people.

• People were supported to receive their medicines safely and in a timely manner by staff who were appropriately trained for their roles.

• We received positive feedback from people that they enjoyed the quality and choice of meals provided.

• The environment was suitable to meet people’s needs living at Dalling House, and the provider had a redevelopment schedule to improve some areas of the homes décor and furnishings.

• People’s rights and freedoms were upheld and staff treated people with dignity and respect.

• People were encouraged to make their own choices and decisions as appropriate, and where people required additional support with this staff followed best practice guidance and legislation to support them.

• People had access to a range of activities to meet their interests, which were flexible to meet their individual needs.

• The service met the characteristics of Good across all areas. More information can be found to evidence this in the full report.

Rating at last inspection: This service was previously rated as Good at the last comprehensive inspection. That report was published on 3 October 2016.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous inspection rating.

Follow up: There is no required follow up to this inspection. However, we will continue to monitor the service and will inspect the service again based on the information we receive.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

This unannounced inspection took place on 2 September 2016. Dalling House provides personal care, support and accommodation to up to 19 people. At the time of our inspection 19 people were using the service.

The service has a registered manager. 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 received safe and appropriate care. The service had identified risks to people’s health and had plans in place to protect them from the risk of harm. Staff followed guidance in place to manage the risks safely. People received appropriate support to take their medicines safely as prescribed. There were sufficient numbers of competent staff available to meet people’s needs.

People received care that reflected their preferences and choices. People and their relatives were involved in planning for their care. Staff assessed people’s needs and involved them in reviewing their support. People were able to make changes on how they wished to receive their support. Staff had guidance on how to deliver people’s care and provided the support as planned.

Staff received support from their managers to undertake their duties to provide care and support to people. Staff were confident in their role and had regular supervision sessions to reflect on their performance. Staff attended regular training courses and had the knowledge and skills to support people.

People gave consent to the support they received. Staff supported people in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The service met the legal requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People told us they enjoyed the choice of food that was available to them at the service. People were encouraged to participate in activities of their choice. People said staff were kind and caring and understood how to meet their needs. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity. People received the support they required to communicate their preferences and needs. Staff considered this when they planned and delivered people’s individual support.

People accessed healthcare services when needed and staff supported them to receive healthcare screenings. People received appropriate support to access specialist advice and treatment in relation to their health needs.

The registered manager sought people and their relative’s views and used their feedback to improve the service. Staff held meetings with people to get their views about the service. People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint.

The registered manager undertook checks on quality of the service to ensure each person received safe care and treatment. There was effective follow up action when necessary to ensure improvements were made.

We looked at the records relating to people's care and support and saw that people's wishes had been taken into account in planning their care. Risks to the health of people living in the home had been assessed and managed in a way that promoted people's independence.

We spoke with five people, all of whom told us they were happy living in the home. One person told us "I love it here, I don't want to leave". Another person said "I'm looked after brilliantly".

We spoke with two relatives who told us their mothers were well cared for. One relative told us their relative had originally come for respite care and decided to stay. They added "I think the staff are wonderful".

We spoke with four members of staff who told us they felt well trained and supported in their role. One member of staff said they had done "loads of training since I've been here".

In this report one of the names of a registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.

We met all the people who lived at the home and spoke individually with seven of them. People told us that Dalling House was a nice place to live and that they "Wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to their friends." Staff were described as "Marvellous" and "They will do anything for you." People said they had choice and control over their lives and that they felt safe and well cared for.

The home was clean at the time of our visit and there was evidence of an ongoing programme of redecoration. Following a previous fault with the passenger lift the home had installed a chair lift which ensured that there was always a way for people to safely mobilise around the home. This demonstrated the provider's ability to learn from its experiences and ongoing commitment to improve.

We spoke with five staff who told us that they felt supported in their roles and had confidence in the management team to deal with any issues or concerns appropriately. The recently appointed activities co-ordinator talked to us enthusiastically about the activities that had recently taken place and those that were planned for the future. We observed the afternoon reminiscence session and saw that people were engaged and enjoying the activity.

The new management arrangements at the home had brought about some changes to the running of Dalling House. We noticed recent improvements in the way records were being kept which meant that information was more up to date and easier to access.

We carried out this review to check on whether the service had met the compliance action that was set at their last review. The registered manager sent us records that proved that all people working and volunteering at the home are now subject to a Criminal Records Bureau check. We did not need to speak with people using the service to assess this outcome on this occasion.

We also checked on how the home had improved the way in which it consulted people about daily menus in order to make sure that they could always make an informed choice of what to eat. We had not made a compliance action about this following our last review, but had suggested improvements be made. The registered manager sent us records that showed how people were being consulted.

Outcome 12 -Requirements relating to workers and Outcome 5-Meeting nutritional needs.

People told us that they were given the care and support they needed and were involved in their personal care planning. They said staff supported them well, were aware of how they liked to be cared for and were kind, friendly and respected their privacy and dignity.

People could decide how to spend their day and could choose to be involved in planned activities if they wished. They had opportunities to be involved in the day to day running of the service and to offer their views on it. Any concerns were addressed and people said staff and the manager were approachable.

People liked their accommodation, they said that the home was clean, their rooms were comfortable and they were happy with them.

People liked the meals at the home, they said meals were well cooked and presented ,there was variety and plenty of choices available, although not everybody had been consulted about their choice of main meal on the day we visited.