Alba Rose is registered to provide residential accommodation for up to 22 older people. Accommodation is provided over two floors. At the time of this inspection the service was providing accommodation to 20 people.

This inspection took place on 22nd May 2017 and was unannounced. A second day of inspection took place on 6 June 2017 and this was announced.

At the last inspection in December 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Staff understood the procedure they needed to follow if they suspected abuse might be taking place. Risks to people were identified and plans were put in place to help manage the risk and minimise them occurring. Medicines were managed safely with an effective system in place. Staff competencies, around administering medication, were regularly checked.

There was sufficient staff on duty. On the day of inspection there was one senior and three care workers to support 20 people. The registered manager was also at the service but was not included in staffing number. Staff had time to provide one to one support and respond to people in a timely manner.

People were supported by a regular team of staff who were knowledgeable about their likes, dislikes and preferences. Most staff had completed up to date training although we did identify some staff who had not completed training in safeguarding and the Mental Capacity Act. Supervision sessions had been delivered by the registered manager to cover shortfalls in such training.

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. Staff supported people to maintain their health and attend routine health care appointments and people were able to choose meals of their choice.

We found the provider had continued to provide a highly responsive service. People were actively involved in the development of their care plans and the areas that mattered to each individual the most. People worked with staff to develop specific instructions to guide staff on how they wished for the support to be delivered. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they contained up to date information that was meeting people’s care needs.

The emphasis was upon meaningful engagement which enhanced quality of life and helped people feel worthwhile and fulfilled. Each person had identified areas of interest within their care plan and was supported to pursue these.

People who used the service had access to a wide range of activities and leisure opportunities. They were encouraged to continue to participate in activities and hobbies that they had enjoyed prior to admission to the service.

The service had a clear process for handling complaints which the registered manager had followed.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and felt supported by the registered manager. Quality assurance processes were in place and regularly carried out by the registered manager to monitor and improve the quality of the service.

The service worked with various health and social care agencies and sought professional advice to ensure individual needs were being met.

Feedback was sought from people who used the service through regular ‘resident meetings’ and feedback forms. This information was analysed and action plans produced when needed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below:

Alba Rose is registered to provide residential accommodation for up to 22 older people. Accommodation is provided over two floors. At the time of this inspection the service was providing accommodation to 20 people.

This inspection took place on 22nd May 2017 and was unannounced. A second day of inspection took place on 6 June 2017 and this was announced.

At the last inspection in December 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Staff understood the procedure they needed to follow if they suspected abuse might be taking place. Risks to people were identified and plans were put in place to help manage the risk and minimise them occurring. Medicines were managed safely with an effective system in place. Staff competencies, around administering medication, were regularly checked.

There was sufficient staff on duty. On the day of inspection there was one senior and three care workers to support 20 people. The registered manager was also at the service but was not included in staffing number. Staff had time to provide one to one support and respond to people in a timely manner.

People were supported by a regular team of staff who were knowledgeable about their likes, dislikes and preferences. Most staff had completed up to date training although we did identify some staff who had not completed training in safeguarding and the Mental Capacity Act. Supervision sessions had been delivered by the registered manager to cover shortfalls in such training.

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. Staff supported people to maintain their health and attend routine health care appointments and people were able to choose meals of their choice.

We found the provider had continued to provide a highly responsive service. People were actively involved in the development of their care plans and the areas that mattered to each individual the most. People worked with staff to develop specific instructions to guide staff on how they wished for the support to be delivered. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they contained up to date information that was meeting people’s care needs.

The emphasis was upon meaningful engagement which enhanced quality of life and helped people feel worthwhile and fulfilled. Each person had identified areas of interest within their care plan and was supported to pursue these.

People who used the service had access to a wide range of activities and leisure opportunities. They were encouraged to continue to participate in activities and hobbies that they had enjoyed prior to admission to the service.

The service had a clear process for handling complaints which the registered manager had followed.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and felt supported by the registered manager. Quality assurance processes were in place and regularly carried out by the registered manager to monitor and improve the quality of the service.

The service worked with various health and social care agencies and sought professional advice to ensure individual needs were being met.

Feedback was sought from people who used the service through regular ‘resident meetings’ and feedback forms. This information was analysed and action plans produced when needed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below:

We spoke with several people who used the service. They told us that the staff always involved them with their care plan. Each person had a named worker and they worked with them to ensure the support they received was appropriate. One person said "I am very pleased with the level and quality of the care provided and particularly the range of activities". Another person indicated "I feel we are well looked after here" and "the staff are pleasant and approachable".

Staff told us that they could discuss any concerns openly at supervisions and meetings, and they were given support by the management team. We were given a copy of the supervision schedule for the service. There was evidence of supervision taking place six times a year, covering subjects such as care, infection control and medication and were evaluated to identify training needs.

Staff told us they were supported to ensure they kept their skills up to date through regular training.

The home was found to be clean and there were audits in place to ensure staff kept up to date with all the cleaning tasks identified.

We saw evidence to show that staff had received training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. Employment checks had been carried out to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

We saw evidence that the provider and manager regularly audit the work carried out by staff. This ensured people received the care and support they required.

People who used the service told us the staff always asked them what they want to do. They said that staff were always polite and treated them with respect. People told us that they were supported to make their own decisions. Everyone had a care plan so that staff knew how to provide appropriate support.

People who used the service were provided with a four week menu in their rooms. Staff told us the menus were chosen by people who used the service and there was a choice at all the meals.

People received their medication in line with their care plan and staff had received training in the ‘safe handling of medication’.

We saw that the organisation had recruitment and induction policies for staff and that checks had been made to keep people who use the service safe.

People who lived at the home told us that staff did their best to help them resolve any concerns or complaints. Two people told us, “I have never had any complaints but I could speak to any of the staff if I had”.

People told us that they were consulted about their care, treatment and the support options which were available to them. They said that they were asked for their views so they felt they were central in making decisions about their care. One person said ‘I have read my care plans and risk assessments and I have signed to say I agree with them’. Another person said ‘l feel my rights are respected at all times’.

The people we spoke with on our visit told us that they always received the help and support they needed. They confirmed that they were encouraged to maintain their independence. One person said ‘The staff know what I need to be helped with. They are very good’. Another person said ‘This is a good place to live. I choose what I want to do. The staff encourage me to maintain my independence. They help me with the things I cannot do for myself’.

People told us that they knew how to raise concerns and said they knew issues raised would be sorted out straight away. One person said ‘I feel protected living here’. Another person said ‘I have never had any concerns to raise at all. The staff are wonderful. I feel safe here’.

The people we spoke with told us that there were enough staff to meet their needs. One person said ‘There is a stable team of staff who work for the proprietor. They all look after us very well’. We get looked after by staff whom we have got to know well. It is like being looked after by my own family’. Another person said ‘I feel the staff have the skills they need to care for me’.

People we spoke with confirmed that the proprietor asked them regularly if everything was alright for them. One person said ‘The proprietor and staff work hard to make sure the service runs smoothly. I would not want to live anywhere else’. Another person said ‘The quality of the service is very good. We are treated as part of a large family. We are asked for our opinions which are taken into account’.