This comprehensive inspection took place on 22 May, 2018 and was unannounced, which meant that nobody at the service knew we would be visiting. The provider registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in April 2017. This was their first inspection.

Manor View is a ‘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.

Manor View provides care for up to 49 people. The home is divided in to two separate units. The main unit, Manor View, provides nursing and residential care for older people living with dementia. The smaller unit, Church View, provides residential care for older people living with dementia. The service is in the Doncaster village of Hatfield.

At the time of our inspection 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. However, the registered manager had recently left and a new manager had been in post five days, when we conducted the inspection.

Risks associated with people’s care and treatment had been identified but action taken to minimise risk had not always been documented. Some people had lost weight but it was not clear what action had been taken.

Some parts of the environment required attention and doors to sluice areas and store rooms had been left open. The kitchen area in Church View required attention to ensure people were not at risk of infection.

Accidents and incidents were recorded but documentation did not always reflect what action had been taken.

The registered provider had systems in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed. Some people had been prescribed medicines on an as and when required basis known as PRN medicines. We saw PRN protocols were in place but lacked detail about when to administer the medicine.

People were safeguarded against the risk of abuse. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about safeguarding and knew what action to take if they suspected it was occurring.

Staff were supported to deliver their role and were knowledgeable about their responsibilities. Staff knew people well.

During our inspection we observed that people who used the service were supported to maintain a balanced diet. However, food and fluid charts gave little information about what people’s daily intake had been and weigh loss was not always monitored.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The service was compliant with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff interacted well with people and treated them with kindness and respect. We observed staff maintaining people’s dignity by knocking on doors prior to entering bedrooms. Some personal information was displayed throughout the home and we asked the management team to consider confidentiality issues.

The registered provider employed an activity co-ordinator who was responsible for arranging outings and events and ensuring people engaged in social stimulation if they wanted to.

We observed staff interacting with people and found they supported people to meet their needs. However, care records we looked at lacked detail.

The registered provider had audits in place to monitor the quality of the service. However, these needed developing and embedding into practice to ensure they encompassed all areas and identified issues.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told