This unannounced inspection took place on 3 November 2016. At the last inspection on 3 November 2015, we found the provider had not always recognised when the care being offered had put restrictions on people’s ability to choose and move around freely. Restricting people’s freedom to move around without the necessary authorisation meant that the provider was not meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards; therefore people’s human rights were not protected. After the inspection, we issued a requirement notice in relation to the breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014. The provider sent us an action plan stating that they had met the relevant legal requirement. During this inspection, we found there had been an improvement because the provider had sought authority to lawfully restrict some people living at the home, to receive care and support in their best interests.

Sharmway Private and Residential Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 11 older adults who may have dementia and/or other health conditions. At the time of our inspection ten people lived at the home.

The provider was also the registered manager and was present during our visit. 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 in November 2015, we found the quality management systems the provider had in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided to people required improvement. At this inspection, although there had been some improvement further improvement was required.

The provider reduced the risk of people being harmed and from potential abuse because the safety of people who used the service was taken seriously. Staff were aware of their responsibility to protect people’s health and wellbeing. There were systems in place to ensure that risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were identified and addressed. Staff understood the various types of abuse, what signs to look for and knew how and who to report any concerns to. Staff also knew what action they needed to take to minimise any potential risk of harm caused through an injury or accident to keep people safe. There were appropriate arrangements in place to ensure peoples’ medicines were obtained and, where appropriate, people were supported to take their medicines safely.

People were supported by staff that had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s individual needs. Suitable staff were recruited and employment checks were completed before they started to work for the service, although the provider did not always follow their recruitment policy. There were sufficient staff numbers on duty to meet the support needs of people living at the home. Staff received training and supervision and staff were happy with the quality of the training and were keen to learn and improve their knowledge base in order to provide effective care.

People had been involved in decisions about their care and received support in line with their care plan. Relatives were also involved in how their family member’s care was planned and delivered. People were encouraged to make choices in the support they received. Staff understood that people have the right to refuse care and that they should not be unlawfully restricted. The provider knew what appropriate action should be taken to protect people’s legal rights.

Staff supported people with snacks and drinks throughout the day. People were offered a choice of meals that they enjoyed. Peoples’ needs were being met because the service worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to meet those needs. People we

This inspection took place on 3 November 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection on 20 January 2014, the provider was meeting the regulations we looked at.

Sharmway Private and Residential Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 11 older adults who may have dementia and/or other health conditions. At the time of our inspection ten people lived at the home.

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.

The provider had not always recognised when the care being offered had put restrictions on people’s ability to choose and move around freely. Restricting people’s freedom to move around without the necessary authorisation meant that the provider was not meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards; therefore people’s human rights were not protected. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

The provider had management systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided to people. However, they were not always effective at identifying when peoples’ liberty was being restricted.

People who lived at the home felt safe and secure. Not everyone who lived at the home could tell us about their experiences and expressed their feelings in different ways. Their relatives felt their family members were kept safe. Staff felt people were kept safe. The provider had processes and systems in place that kept people safe and protected them from the risk of harm.

People received their medicines as prescribed and appropriate records were kept when medicines were administered by trained staff.

Risks to people had been assessed appropriately and equipment was maintained and available for staff to use.

There was sufficient staff on duty to meet the support needs of people. The provider ensured staff were recruited and trained to meet the care needs of people.

People were supported to access health care professionals to ensure that their health care needs were met. Health care needs for people were assessed and regularly reviewed

People, relatives and health care professionals, felt staff were caring, friendly and treated people with kindness and respect.

People were involved in group or individual social activities to prevent them from being isolated.

People and relatives were confident that if they had any concerns or complaints, they would be listened to and the matters addressed quickly.

There were 11 people living at the home on the day of our inspection. We spoke with five people, two relatives, three staff and the manager/owner of the home about the service provided.

All the people we spoke with told us positive things about the service they had received. One

person told us "She is good looking after us". All the relatives we spoke with were complimentary about the service. One person told us, “The care is such good quality. So good and do a wonderful job.” This meant people were happy with the care provided.

Records showed that people needs had been assessed and planned so that people received individualised care. We saw that staff treated people with respect and dignity and people were given choices. Health needs were met by a range of health professionals. One relative told us, “Can’t fault the care.” One person was heard arranging a visit to the doctor the following day with the manager. This meant that people’s needs were met.

Recruitment processes ensured that people were protected from

unsuitable staff working at the home. All the staff we spoke with had the skills and knowledge to protect people from harm. We saw that people were comfortable in the presence of staff.

Systems were in place to ensure that staff received the support they needed to care for people safely.

We saw that all the required records were maintained and stored safely.

Our inspection was unannounced no one knew we would be visiting. There were 11 people living at the home on the day of our inspection. We spoke with seven people and two staff to find out their views about the service provided.

People we spoke with told us positive things about the service they had received. One person told us "There is not a bad thing about this place, we are well looked after”. Another person said "This is my home now and I love it here". A staff member told us that in their view the home was very good. They said "People are very well cared for, they are happy and safe".

We saw that staff had treated people with respect and dignity. People told us that choices had been offered and their views had been taken into consideration.

People's needs had been assessed by a range of health professionals including doctors and the optician. This meant that people's health care needs had been monitored and met.

We found that people engaged in activities that they enjoyed and were able to observe their chosen religion.

Recruitment processes were robust which meant that people were protected from unsuitable staff working at the home. We saw that staff had received training on a number of subjects which meant that they had up to date knowledge to support the people who lived at the home.

We found that systems had been used to monitor how the home had been run.