At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good with outstanding in the key question Responsive. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going 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.

Swanland House is a residential care home that provides accommodation and support to a maximum of 21 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. The service is a privately owned residential care home that operates in a Grade II listed building. The home is surrounded by well kept gardens in the village of Swanland in east Yorkshire.

Staff interacted with people at every available opportunity and understood the importance of researching people's history and interests. This information was utilised to provide engaging activities and events that people enjoyed.

Staff were knowledgeable and knew people very well, taking a proactive approach to ensure changes in care needs were updated without delays to support people as they had chosen.

People’s support plans were concise and person-centred. Staff supported people to enjoy one to one and group activities, encouraging relatives to join in when they could to create a homely atmosphere.

People were protected from avoidable harm and abuse. Systems and processes were in place to record and action any outcomes where safeguarding concerns had been raised.

Assessments of risks associated with people’s care and support and for their environment had been completed. Assessments and support plans were in place and regularly reviewed to ensure people received safe care and support without undue restrictions in place.

The provider maintained safe staffing levels and recruitment included pre-employment checks to ensure people were of suitable character to work in a care home environment.

Systems and processes ensured safe management of medicines and infection control.

People received appropriate care and support to meet their individual needs because staff were supported to develop their existing skills and knowledge alongside regular supervisions to carry out their role.

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.

People told us that staff maintained their privacy and dignity whilst promoting their independence when possible. We observed practices that supported this information.

Staff were knowledgeable about supporting people's diverse needs and how to promote equality in the home. Staff knew people well ensuring their care and support reflected their wishes and preferences.

Systems and processes were in place to support people should they need to raise a complaint. Relatives told us that the registered manager was proactive in dealing with any concerns.

The provider sought feedback from people and their relatives to improve the service and lives of people living at the home. People's relatives or representatives were invited to participate in the running of their care provision.

Quality assurance systems were in place to drive improvements within the service. The registered manager knew the people living at the service and their relatives; this had built strong foundations for ensuring all aspects of people's needs were met. Staff told us the manager was approachable and extremely supportive, this added to the friendly and welcoming atmosphere of the home.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The inspection of Swanland House took place on 16 and 18 December 2015 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection of Swanland House since the change of registered provider in May 2015.

Swanland House is a residential care home that provides accommodation and support to a maximum of 21 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. The service is a privately owned residential care home that operates in a Grade II listed building. There are eight shared bedrooms, four single bedrooms and one independent flat. However, the service does not usually accommodate more than 18 people as it prefers to use as many bedrooms as possible for single occupancy. Some rooms have en-suite facilities. There are pleasant gardens around the home and ample car parking spaces for visitors. The service is on a main road through the village of Swanland in East Yorkshire.

The registered provider is required to have a registered manager in post and on the day of the inspection 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.

People that used the service were protected from the risks of harm or abuse because the provider had ensured staff were appropriately trained in safeguarding adults from abuse. Staff understood their responsibilities regarding safeguarding and they were knowledgeable about the types and signs and symptoms of abuse. There were systems in place to ensure safeguarding referrals were made to the appropriate department.

We found that people were safe because whistle blowing was appropriately addressed and investigated and risks to people were reduced because risk assessments were in place and followed.

We saw that staff were employed and deployed in sufficient numbers to meet people’s needs and staff recruitment followed safe policies, procedures and practices, so that people were only supported by staff that were suitable to care for vulnerable people. We found that people were protected from unsafe practices in medication management and infection control, because there were systems in place to ensure these areas of care were carefully monitored and delivered.

People were supported by care staff that were trained and qualified in appropriate care practices and had care qualifications. Staff received induction and were supervised as part of an appraisal system. All of this meant that people were supported by competent and well managed staff.

People and their families experienced good communication from the staff. Visitors told us they were always kept informed of the care and support issues relating to their relative. This meant people and relatives were included in how people’s care was delivered.

We found that the registered manager ensured people were protected by the right legislation when their liberty was deprived. We saw that people received adequate levels of food and drink and were monitored regarding their health care needs so that they maintained good health wherever possible.

We saw that people enjoyed a suitable, clean, comfortable and appropriate environment in which to live. People were treated well by staff whose approach was kind and caring and people had the information they needed to live fulfilling lives. We found that people’s general well-being was regularly monitored and evaluated to ensure they were satisfied with the service of care they received.

We saw that where necessary people who had no relatives or close friends were represented by an advocate to ensure their rights were maintained. Their personal information was kept confidential and their privacy, dignity was upheld, which meant people were confident the detail of their lives was known only to themselves. We saw that people’s independence was encouraged as much as possible, so they retained control over their lives.

People had person-centred care plans in place to ensure their needs were planned for and met as much as possible. They engaged in a variety of activities and pastimes in the service as well as in the community and all of their own choosing.

We saw that people were supported with their mobility and comfort using appropriate equipment that staff were trained to use and which was safely maintained. People made independent choices about their lifestyles and were encouraged to maintain healthy relationships with relatives and friends so that they continued to be part of a family life.

We saw that there were systems in place for people to address and have resolved any complaints they voiced. These systems were used to ensure the registered provider and registered manager learnt from the experience of resolving people’s issues, so that mistakes were not made again.

People benefitted from a culture that was positive, friendly and caring. The management team were supportive, open and inclusive of everyone that lived and worked in the service, which meant that people were able to influence the running of the service.

There was good communication among everyone concerned in the service and the quality of service delivery was assured using a quality assurance system of monitoring and checking.