This inspection took place on 15 August 2018 and was unannounced.

Devonshire Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service accommodates people in one adapted building. There are two floors. The first floor specialises in providing care to people who live with dementia.

The provider is The Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution Care Company; and therefore, people who are masons, or who have close masonic connections are given admission priority. People without masonic connections can live in the home.

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.

The registered manager and their team provided excellent leadership to staff; and had considerably improved the life experiences of people who lived at Devonshire Court.

The provider and management team had a long-term vision for the home which they were working extremely hard to achieve. They were working to excellence and expected high standards from their staff. The staff group were excited by the vision and plans for the home and worked with management to achieve this.

There were good staffing levels to meet the care needs of people who lived at the home. The care staff team were supported by a team of volunteers and activity workers to meet all of people’s health and social care needs. The range of staff available meant that people enjoyed a life with their social, and physical needs extremely well met.

The provider’s recruitment process, which involved people who lived at the home, reduced the risks of employing staff unsuitable to provide care.

The service provided a vast range of activities for people which suited their needs and abilities, and which people thoroughly enjoyed. People and their advocates were fully involved in discussing and reviewing their care needs.

People received care from a dedicated staff team who were kind, caring and compassionate, and who demonstrated they would go the extra mile for people when necessary. Visitors were very welcome at the home, and accommodation was available if visitors travelled from afar.

People who lived at the home were fully involved in the running of the home. They were part of the recruitment process, and their voice was heard and acted on because of regular resident meetings.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff understood the importance of treating people equally and respected each person’s human rights.

There was an extensive range of checks for different parts of the service to ensure people remained safe, and received a high-quality service. The management team was proactive in learning from mistakes to enhance future practice. Accidents or incidents which involved people were thoroughly analysed to determine whether further action was necessary or whether there were trends or patterns which needed further exploration.

The service provided excellent end of life care to people, and some staff had been accredited with the Gold Standard Framework, which aims to ensure people live their lives pain free, and the way they wanted to, until they die.

Medicines were managed safely, and people received good access to other healthcare services when required. Staff understood and acted on people’s identified risks to reduce the chances of harm to people’s health and well-being.

Staff received extremely good in-house and external training, and excellent support by management to sup