This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 17 April 2018. We last inspected this home on 2 and 4 February 2016 when it was rated as ‘Good’ overall. It was rated ‘Requires Improvement’ in Safe and the provider sent us an action plan detailing how they would bring this key question up to ‘Good’.

Ingleside Residential Care Home (referred to in this report as Ingleside) 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 home is registered to accommodate up to 17 older people in one adapted building. Nursing care is not provided by staff at Ingleside. This is provided by the community nursing service. At the time of this inspection in April 2018 there were 15 people living in the home.

Ingleside had 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.’

At our last inspection on 2 and 4 February 2016 we rated this service good overall and requires improvement in Safe. At this inspection on 17 April 2018 we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good overall and the rating in Safe had improved to good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious 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.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Ingleside provided elderly people living with dementia and other health conditions with accommodation, care and support. People were protected from risks relating to their health, their dementia related behaviours, mobility, medicines, nutrition and possible abuse. Staff had assessed individual risks to people and had taken action to seek guidance and minimise identified risks. Staff knew how to recognise possible signs of abuse.

Where accidents and incidents had taken place, these had been reviewed and action had been taken to reduce the risks of reoccurrence. Staff supported people to take their medicines safely and staffs’ knowledge relating to the administration of medicines were regularly checked. Staff told us they felt comfortable raising concerns.

Recruitment procedures were in place to help ensure only people of good character were employed by the home. Staff underwent Disclosure and Barring Service (police record) checks before they started work. Staffing numbers at the home were sufficient to meet people’s needs. Staff had the competencies and information they required in order to meet people’s needs. Staff received sufficient training as well as supervision and appraisal.

People’s individual care needs were identified and plans were put in place to guide staff on how to meet these. People’s care plans contained detailed person centred information about their needs, histories, preferences and communication styles. People were supported to have enough to eat and drink in ways that met their needs and preferences.

Staff treated people with respect and kindness. There was a warm and pleasant atmosphere at the home where people and staff shared jokes and laughter. Staff knew people and their preferences well. People spoke highly of the care and support they received at Ingleside and the caring nature of the staff. Comments included, “Staff are friendly, kind and caring”, “I get a good level of support here, and all staff are kind, caring and respectful” and “The attitudes of staff are caring, friendly and kind. It’s never too much trouble when I need help.”

Staff had a good unde

The inspection took place on 2 and 4 February 2016.

Ingleside Residential Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 17 people in a residential area of Weymouth. At the time of our inspection there were 13 older people living in the home.

There was a registered manager in post who had led the home for eight years. 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 were protected from harm because staff understood the risks they faced and how to reduce these risks. They also knew how to identify and respond to abuse. They knew which agencies they should report concerns about people’s care. Care and treatment was delivered in a way that met people’s individual needs and staff kept records about the care they provided. Staff were not all able to describe all the methods of evacuation available to them and this was not recorded in the fire procedure which focussed on a full evacuation.

Staff were consistent in their knowledge of people’s care needs and spoke with confidence about the care they provided to meet these needs. They told us they felt supported in their roles and had taken training that provided them with the necessary knowledge and skills. They understood how the Mental Capacity Act 2005 provided a framework for the care they provided and encouraged people to make decisions about their care.

People had access to health care professionals and were supported to maintain their health by staff. People received their medicines as they were prescribed.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards had been applied for, when people who needed to live in the home to be cared for safely did not have the mental capacity to consent to this. Staff understood these Safeguards.

Some people were engaged with their own activities that reflected their preferences. Individual and group activities were also provided by a self-employed activities coordinator who liaised with care staff about people’s needs.

People described the food as good and there were systems in place to ensure people had enough food and drink.

People and their relatives were positive about the care they received from the home and told us the staff were kind. Staff treated people and visitors with respect and kindness.

The registered manager took responsibility for quality assurance in the home. Where improvements were identified as necessary following an audit or feedback from external agencies action was taken to ensure they happened.

People’s needs were assessed and care was delivered to meet their needs. Care plans identified people`s needs, provided clear details about how care should be delivered and preferences respected. Everyone we spoke with told us that they were happy with the care they received. One person told us, “The staff look after me perfectly here.”

People who used the service told us that there were enough staff to meet their needs. The provider had an effective system in place to ensure sufficient staffing levels based on their assessments of individual need and risk.

People told us they believed the staff were competent in their roles and they were happy with the standard of the care they received. Staff had undertaken training relevant to their role and received regular supervision.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of care that was provided. We saw that the registered manager undertook regular reviews of people’s care records and we saw the individual needs assessment document was also updated when a change in a person’s needs were identified.

15 people were living in the home at the time of the inspection. One the first day of the inspection the manager was on a week’s leave but came in to assist. We observed people being supported by staff and spoke with five people in private and two of their relatives. We saw that people's privacy, dignity and independence were respected and that people's views, wishes and experiences were taken into account.

All five people told us they were happy at Ingleside. One person told us “it’s good here. The staff are very attentive”. A family member said “It’s a happy place. Staff always take the time to talk to me”.

We looked at care plans for nine people who required varying degrees of support. Individual needs of people had been assessed and reviewed and care plans updated in the light of changing needs.

The provider had no system in place for providing sufficient staffing levels based on analysis of need and risk assessments undertaken.

We looked at safeguarding arrangements for staff training, talked to staff and people who used the service and reviewed care plans. We found that people were protected because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent it from happening.

The provider had in place systems that sought people's views and took account of complaints and comments. This meant the provider had an effective system to assess and monitor the quality of service.