This inspection took place on 9 August 2018 and was unannounced. At our last inspection in August 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and 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.

Westgate 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. Westgate accommodates up to 7 people in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection 6 people lived at the home.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 the last inspection in August 2016 we rated the key question ‘Is this service Safe?’ as ‘Requires improvement.’ At this inspection the service had improved to now be rated as good. The provider had made improvements to the safety of the premises to reduce risks to people. People continued to receive safe care because staff knew how to report any harm. Risks to people’s safety were thoroughly explored and well managed to enable people to live an as ordinary life as possible. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and people’s medicines were managed safely. The home environment was kept clean and hygienic.

People received effective care to meet their assessed needs because staff had relevant training and support to help them in their role. Staff sought people’s consent and any restrictions on people’s liberty were understood. People continued to be supported with preparing and choosing what they ate and drank. People’s health was maintained with access to a range of healthcare professionals.

People were supported by staff who demonstrated a caring and kind approach and who protected their privacy and dignity. People continued to be involved in decisions about their care and their choices were respected.

People continued to receive care that was responsive to their needs. Their individual needs and preferences were known and staff were flexible in responding to changes in people’s needs. People felt happy to approach staff with any concerns or complaints.

The provider continued to review the quality of care via their own audits and checks which were effective in identifying improvements which had been acted upon. People were happy at the way the home was run and their views were regularly sought. There was a positive culture which focused on people to provide them with a lifestyle of their choosing.

Our inspection took place on 22 August 2016 and was unannounced.

This was our first inspection of this provider since they had been registered with us on 18 December 2013.

The provider is registered to accommodate and deliver personal care to seven people who lived with a learning disability or an associated need. Six people lived at the home at the time of our inspection. We started our inspection early in the morning. We did this to enable us to meet and speak with as many of the people we could in case they all went out into the community later in the day.

The manager was registered with us and was present during our inspection. 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 told us that they felt safe at the home with the staff. There were systems in place that staff knew they should follow if at any time they felt that people may be at risk of abuse. Some environmental issues, the night fire risk assessment and medicine systems did not ensure that people would always be safe. Night staffing levels had not been determined using a tool that would determine the dependency level of each person to show the precise number of staff required to keep people safe.

New staff were given induction training to ensure that they had the knowledge of how to support people safely and appropriately when they started work. Staff had received all of the other training they needed to do their job safely. Staff had received training and understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS) and ensured that people were not unlawfully restricted. People were offered meal choices to ensure that their preferences and dietary needs were met. People received input from a range of health care professionals to meet their healthcare needs.

People were supported by staff who were kind and friendly. Relatives were welcomed by staff who were polite and helpful. Care plans highlighted people’s needs and preferences and people and their relatives were involved in reviews.

A complaints procedure was available for people to use and people told us that they would be happy to use it if they had the need. People and their relatives were encouraged to make their views known on the quality of the service.

The provider had a leadership processes in place that people and their relatives understood. Staff were led, directed and supported in their work.