We inspected the home on 28 February 2017. The inspection was unannounced. There were 41 people living in the home on the day of our inspection.

The home had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers (‘the provider’) 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.

Following our last inspection in October 2014 we rated the home as Good. At this inspection we were pleased to find service quality had been maintained and the rating remains as Good.

One of the directors of the registered provider (‘the owner’) worked hands-on seven days a week and had a personal and highly principled commitment to caring for people with kindness and compassion. This was clearly understood by staff and reflected in every aspect of their work. Staff understood what was important to each person and worked closely with each other and other professionals to promote their well-being and happiness.

The provider had a rigorous approach to staff recruitment to ensure new care staff had the right values to work in a caring and person-centred way. Staff had the knowledge and skills required to meet people’s individual needs effectively and were actively encouraged to study for national qualifications. Staff demonstrated their understanding of how to support people who lacked capacity to make some decisions for themselves.

Both the owner and the registered manager maintained a visible, hands-on role within the home and provided staff with strong, values-led leadership. Staff worked together in a well-organised and mutually supportive way and were proud to work in the home.

The provider organised a programme of communal activities and events to provide people with physical and mental stimulation. People were provided with home-cooked food of good quality that met their individual needs and preferences.

The provider was committed to the ongoing improvement of the home and maintained a range of systems to monitor service quality. The provider sought people’s opinions through regular customer surveys and encouraged people to raise any concerns or suggestions directly with the registered manager or owner.

The provider assessed any potential risks to people’s safety and welfare and put preventive measures in place where required. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns to keep people safe from harm.

People’s medicines were managed safely and staff worked closely with local healthcare services to ensure people had access to any specialist support they required.

We inspected the home on 28 February 2017. The inspection was unannounced. There were 41 people living in the home on the day of our inspection.

The home had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers (‘the provider’) 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.

Following our last inspection in October 2014 we rated the home as Good. At this inspection we were pleased to find service quality had been maintained and the rating remains as Good.

One of the directors of the registered provider (‘the owner’) worked hands-on seven days a week and had a personal and highly principled commitment to caring for people with kindness and compassion. This was clearly understood by staff and reflected in every aspect of their work. Staff understood what was important to each person and worked closely with each other and other professionals to promote their well-being and happiness.

The provider had a rigorous approach to staff recruitment to ensure new care staff had the right values to work in a caring and person-centred way. Staff had the knowledge and skills required to meet people’s individual needs effectively and were actively encouraged to study for national qualifications. Staff demonstrated their understanding of how to support people who lacked capacity to make some decisions for themselves.

Both the owner and the registered manager maintained a visible, hands-on role within the home and provided staff with strong, values-led leadership. Staff worked together in a well-organised and mutually supportive way and were proud to work in the home.

The provider organised a programme of communal activities and events to provide people with physical and mental stimulation. People were provided with home-cooked food of good quality that met their individual needs and preferences.

The provider was committed to the ongoing improvement of the home and maintained a range of systems to monitor service quality. The provider sought people’s opinions through regular customer surveys and encouraged people to raise any concerns or suggestions directly with the registered manager or owner.

The provider assessed any potential risks to people’s safety and welfare and put preventive measures in place where required. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns to keep people safe from harm.

People’s medicines were managed safely and staff worked closely with local healthcare services to ensure people had access to any specialist support they required.

During our inspection visit we spoke with seven people who used the service and with four relatives. All of these people gave us positive feedback about the service. A person who used the service said, “The staff make the place don’t they. They’re kind and caring people and so you can’t go far wrong can you.” A relative said, “Nothing is ever too much trouble for the staff and I go away reassured that my mother is safe and well cared for.”

People had been given accurate information about the fees they would have to pay. Records showed that people had been correctly charged for the facilities and services they had received.

People said that they received all of the health and personal care they needed. Records confirmed that assistance had been provided in a safe, reliable and responsive way.

People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed and because good standards of hygiene were being maintained.

There were robust recruitment and selection procedures to help ensure that staff were trustworthy and caring people.

There were measures to check that people were being reliably provided with the facilities and services they needed.

On the day we visited Nene Lodge Retirement Home there were 38 people living there.

People we spoke with told us care met their needs. A relative told us, “They look after all mum’s needs. If she has an episode they deal with mum first and then let me know.”

People told us they were involved in their care and records showed they had signed their care plans.

People we spoke with told us the staff worked hard. One person said, “They are pretty good the girls here. They have always got plenty to do but they do a good job.”

We spent time observing the mid day meal and could see people were happy with the meal. One person told us, “We have good meals.” Although there was no choice offered at the mid day meal people were aware they could request something different. The cook and care workers were aware of peoples food likes and dislikes.

We saw one person who chose to have a banana on their cereal for breakfast was not supported in this choice and purchased their own fruit.

The home was not maintained to an appropriate level of cleanliness and infection control methods were not always robust.

Medication was managed appropriately.

People told us they felt their independence was promoted and said they were able to get up when they wanted to. One person said, “I like to get up early, I wake up at six o’clock.” Another person told us, “I don’t get up any earlier than I want to.”

We asked people for their views on the care provided and they told us they felt well supported. One person said, “Everything is very good here.” Another person told us staff were aware of their needs when they moved to the home as, “My daughter explained them (my needs) for me.”

People said they were happy with the arrangements for activities. Some said they preferred quieter activities such as reading and word searches, but others told us they enjoyed more active pursuits such as listening to the visiting keyboard player. One person said, “I occasionally go for a walk to the pub, I would like to do that more often.”

We asked people if they felt safe in the home and they said they did, and they did not feel they had ever been put at risk. One person told us they felt safe because, “somebody comes when I press the buzzer.”

People told us that staff speak with them and treat them in an appropriate way and they did not have any concerns about how they had been treated.

The people we spoke with confirmed that their needs were being met and the staff were understanding and helpful. They told us that the staff who supported them knew what they were doing and they had been able to provide them with the support they required. One person said, “They are trained to a point, only some are able to do things, only some can give out medication.”

People told us they were able to discuss things freely with staff. They also said the manager and provider were approachable and they could raise anything they wanted with them. Several people commented how helpful the handyman was.

People told us they thought they were provided with everything they needed in the home. One person had commented in a survey “I feel very safe and looked after.”