High Lodge is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and 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. High Lodge is registered to accommodate 29 people in one building. At the time of our inspection 21 people were using the service. High Lodge accommodates people in one building and support is provided on two floors. There are two communal lounges, a dining area and a garden that people can access. Some of the people living here have dementia.

At our last inspection on 26 January 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

There is a registered manager in place. 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 continued to receive safe care. People remained safe and risks to people were considered and reviewed when needed. Staff understood safeguarding and when needed referrals were made to the relevant people. Learning logs were completed by the provider so that when things went wrong lessons could be learnt. There were enough staff available and medicines were managed in a safe way. Infection control procedures were followed.

People continued to receive effective care. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible. People enjoyed the food available and were offered a choice. Staff were supported and trained to ensure that they had the skills to support people effectively. When needed people received support from health professionals. The home was adapted and decorated to meet people needs and had decoration and signage to support people living with dementia.

People continued to be supported in a caring way. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained. People were encouraged to be independent and supported in a kind and caring way by staff they were happy with.

People continued to receive responsive care. People received their care that was responsive to their needs and their preferences were considered. Compliant procedures were in place and followed when needed. People had the opportunity to participate in activities they enjoyed. When people were in need of end of life care they received the support in line with their wishes.

The service remained well led. People, relatives and staff were asked for their feedback on the quality of the service. Quality assurance systems were in place to identify where improvements could be made and when needed these changes were made. There was a registered manager in place who notified us of significant events that occurred within the home.

We inspected this service on 26 January 2016 and it was an unannounced inspection. Our last inspection took place in May 2013 and we found no concerns with the areas we looked at.

The service was registered to provide accommodation for up to 29 people. At the time of our inspection 25 people were using the service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 staff knew how to recognise and report potential abuse. Risks to people were identified and managed to keep people safe. There were enough staff available to meet people’s needs and people received their medicines as prescribed.

When people were unable to consent to their care, capacity assessments had been completed and decisions had been made and recorded in people’s best interests. When people were being restricted in their best interest, this had been considered and applications and authorisations for this were in place.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficiently to maintain a healthy diet. When needed people had access to input from health professionals. People and relatives were happy with the support they received from the staff. They were able to make choices about their day and encouraged to be as independent as possible. Opportunities to take part in activities people enjoyed were also offered.

Friends and families were free to visit when they chose and told us they felt involved with people’s care.

Quality monitoring checks were completed to bring about improvements. The provider sought the opinion of people and relatives to bring about positive changes. People knew who the registered manager was and felt they were approachable. If people wanted to complain they were confident this would be dealt with.

During the inspection we found Abele View to be pleasant, bright and comfortable. Consideration had been given to the decoration within the home. There were pictorial prompts available to support people with dementia with recognition and orientation. A hairdressing studio had recently been introduced. This area was bright and inviting and would make ‘visiting the hairdresser’ a pleasant experience.

A service must uphold and maintain the privacy, dignity and independence of people who use the service. We saw staff spoke to people living at the home in a respectful manner. The people we spoke with were complimentary of the staff. One person said, “Full marks for politeness”.

We saw from the care plans we viewed that people’s care was reviewed appropriately and professional health advice was sought when necessary, for example a GP and district nurse.

We saw that people who used the service were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink. The people we spoke with said the food was good and choices of meals were available.

The staff we spoke with said training appropriate to their role was available. They confirmed they had regular one to one meetings with the manager. All staff we spoke with said they felt supported in their role.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided at Abele View, this included satisfaction surveys for people living at, and visiting the home.

We had inspected this home in September 2012. At the inspection we had identified non compliance in three areas. The provider had produced an action plan. We carried out this inspection to review the action plan and to check on the care and welfare of people using this service.

We observed that staff spoke in a manner which was engaging and polite. One person who lived at the home said, “I am looked after very well”.

The staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about care requirements. Not all the required documentation and recoding for care delivery was in place. For example, in order to protect people from pressure damage to their skin, some people required re positioning every two hours. There was no recording of this. Lack of recording meant the service could not always be confident care had been delivered in a consistent manner.

During our last inspection we found that staff did not all receive the appropriate training supervision and support required. We reviewed the training records and found training opportunities had increased. There was a schedule in place for staff to receive one to one meetings and supervisions with a senior member of staff.