At our last inspection in January 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of 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.

Lindly House is a Residential Care Home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Lindly House accommodates up to ten people in one adapted building, where people had access to communal areas along with their own bedrooms. At the time of the inspection, there were ten people using the service.

People were protected from abuse and had risks to their safety assessed and planned for. People received support from sufficient staff and had their medicines administered safely. People were protected from the risk of cross infection. The provider had systems in place to learn when things went wrong.

People had their needs assessed and care plans were in place to meet them. Staff were trained and received support in their role. People received consistent care and the environment had been designed to meet their needs. People had a choice of meals and were supported to eat and drink safely. People were supported to access health professionals advice and had their health needs met.

People had choice and control of their lives and staff were aware of how to support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service were supportive of this practice.

People were supported by caring staff. People could choose for themselves and were supported to maintain their independence. People’s communication needs were assessed. People’s privacy and dignity was protected by staff.

People were supported by staff that understood their preferences. People understood how to make complaints about the service and felt these would be addressed.

The registered manager submitted notifications as required and understood their responsibilities. The rating from the last inspection was on display.

People’s views about the service were sought and they were involved in decisions about the service they received. There were regular checks on the quality of the service. There were audits in place and action was taken to drive improvement.

We inspected this service on 28 January 2016. This was an unannounced inspection. Our last inspection took place in September 2014 and at that time we found the home was meeting the regulations that we checked them against.

Lindly House is registered to provide accommodation and nursing care for up to 10 people. People who use the service have physical health and/or mental health needs, such as dementia. At the time of our inspection eight people were using the service.

The service 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People’s safety was maintained because risks were assessed and planned for and the staff understood how to keep people safe. People’s medicines were managed safely.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to keep people safe. Staff received training that provided them with the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs effectively.

Staff sought people’s consent before they provided care and support. When people did not have the ability to make decisions about their care, the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were followed. These requirements ensure that where appropriate, decisions are made in people’s best interests when they are unable to do this for themselves.

People were supported to access suitable amounts of food and drink of their choice and their health and wellbeing needs were monitored. Advice from health and social care professionals was sought and followed when required.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion and people’s dignity and privacy was promoted. People were encouraged to make choices about their care and independence was promoted.

Effective systems were in place to enable people to receive high quality end of life care if this was required.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning of their care and care was delivered in accordance with people’s care preferences. People’s feedback was sought and used to improve the care.

People were supported to participate in social and leisure activities that met their preferences.

People knew how to make a complaint and complaints were managed in accordance with the provider’s complaints policy.

There was a positive atmosphere within the home and the manager and provider regularly assessed and monitored the quality of care to ensure standards were met and maintained.

We completed this inspection because we received information of concern that alleged people’s care preferences were not consistently met. It was also alleged that there were not enough staff to keep people safe.

At the time of our inspection ten people were using the service. We spoke with three people who used the service, three members of care staff and the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

People told us they were happy with the care they received and shared no concerns with us.

We looked at three people’s care records to see if their care preferences were recorded. We also looked at three weeks staff rotas to check that staffing levels matched the provider’s minimum staffing levels.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked and what the staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Based on the information we received we asked if this service was safe and responsive?

Is the service safe?

The service was safe. There were enough staff on duty to keep people safe. The registered manager had a system in place that ensured staffing levels were based on people’s needs.

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive. People received care that met their individual care preferences and needs.

We spoke with five people who used the service and their relatives who told us that they were happy with the care they received. One person told us, “I like it here the staff know exactly what I need”. Another person told us, “I enjoy being here it is nice to have some company and the staff are very polite”.

People told us they felt safe and the staff treated them well. Staff we spoke with explained the actions they would take if they felt that people were at risk of harm.

We saw that staff had received a detailed induction before they provided support to people who used the service. Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the management to carry out their role.

The provider had a system in place to record and investigate complaints about the service provided. People who used the service told us they knew how to complain if they needed to.

During our inspection we spoke with five people using the service, two staff on duty, the registered manager and four visitors. People spoke positively about how they were able to make decisions about their care, spend their time and enjoy shared interests and social events.

We saw that staff treated people with respect and dignity. People told us that choices had been offered and their views had been taken into consideration. One person said, “The staff listen to what we have to say and do their best to make sure we are happy.”

People told us they were satisfied with the care and support they received and were happy with the staff team that supported them. One person said, “It is lovely here, it is like you're own house with company.”

People using the service told us they felt safe, we observed the way staff interacted with people and we saw positive relationships. We found the care and support were delivered in a warm and caring manner. Records were informative and up to date.

We looked at the number of staff on duty and considered there were enough staff available to meet the needs of the people using the service.

We checked records were stored safely and correctly, these systems were improved on the day of our inspection to ensure their safety.

During the course of the inspection comments were received from a number of people using the service, and from people visiting at the time. People who were able to share their experiences of living at Lindly House were positive about the care they receive. People told us of the openness and opportunity to contribute, that they were treated with respect, and that visitors were made to feel welcome. They told us of a confident and open relationship with the care staff, especially regarding the friendliness of the staff, and the good standards of care, "Always reliable, always there when I need them, it’s a good place to live".

They told us that they find the environment clean and fresh, and were complimentary of the quality and presentation of their living areas, "Lindly House achieves a high standard of cleanliness". People said they enjoy their meals, and that their bedrooms are comfortable and warm.

Staff told us that staff morale is high with strong teamwork, and they receive lots of training opportunities to meet the individual needs of the people using the service.