We inspected Alliston Road on 23 & 24 May 2017. This was an unannounced inspection. Alliston Road provides accommodation for up to 43 older people who have dementia care needs. There were 38 people living at the home when we visited. At the last inspection on September 2015 the service was rated as Good.

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 experiences of people who lived at the service were positive. People and their relatives told us they felt the service was safe, staff were kind and the care they received was good. We found staff had a good understanding of their responsibility with regard to safeguarding adults.

People’s needs were assessed and their preferences identified as much as possible across all aspects of their care. Risks were identified and plans were in place to monitor and reduce risks. People had access to relevant health professionals when they needed them. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff employed by the service. Staff had been recruited safely with appropriate checks on their backgrounds completed.

Medicines were stored and administered safely. However topical medicines were not always recorded correctly and stored appropriately. We have made a recommendation about the management of topical medicines.

Staff undertook training and received regular supervision to help support them to provide effective care. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). MCA and DoLS is law protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves or whom the state has decided their liberty needs to be deprived in their own best interests. We saw people were able to choose what they ate and drank.

People’s needs were met in a personalised manner. We found that care plans were in place which included information about how to meet a person’s individual and assessed needs. People’s cultural and religious needs were respected when planning and delivering care. Discussions with staff members showed that they respected people’s sexual orientation so that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people could feel accepted and welcomed in the service.

The service had a complaints procedure in place and we found that complaints were investigated and where possible resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant.

Staff told us the service had an open and inclusive atmosphere and the registered manager and deputy manager were approachable and open. People, relatives and staff felt the registered manager had improved the quality of the service since they had started. The service had various quality assurance and monitoring mechanisms in place. These included surveys, audits and staff and relative meetings.

People we spoke to told us they felt they were respected by staff. One person told us "staff always knock on my door." People were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement. People we spoke to told us they could go out and meet their friends in the community.

People told us they received care which met their needs. One person told us the care was "good". A relative we spoke with told us "I'm happy with the care." People's files contained information about their 'life history' which allowed staff to know details about their lives. This enabled staff to better cater to their needs. One staff member told us this helps her "know the person better."

People we spoke with told us they felt safe with the care they received. We found there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. We reviewed the staff rota. We saw during the day there were enough staff to meet people's needs.

The provider had a system in place to identify, assess and manage risks.

We found people were treated with respect and dignity. We saw staff talking to people in polite and respectful manner. People told us staff treated them with respect. Staff knew how to respect people's privacy when they assisted them with personal care. We found staff obtained people's consent and acted in accordance with their wishes.

We found risk assessments had been undertaken to identify risks to people and plans had been put in place to ensure people's safety and welfare. We found people felt safe with the care they received. Staff were knowledgeable about the different forms of abuse and how to recognise the signs of abuse.

We found staff safely administered medicines and kept them safely locked away. We also found there were appropriate procedures in place to record medicines.

People told us they felt the premises were clean and hygienic. We found the provider was taking appropriate steps to maintain the cleanliness and hygiene of the premises including providing hand wash and hand sanitiser in all toilets and bathrooms.

We found staff were supported in their roles and responsibilities and from time to time were enabled to pursue further qualifications.

The views of people and their relatives were regular sought about the quality of the service they received. People's records were kept safely and were easily located when we requested them.

People told us that staff were “alright” and treated them with respect. One person said that they got up when they wanted to and went to bed when they wanted to. People indicated that they are satisfied with their care. They said they like their rooms and were comfortable. Relatives told us that they found the home very clean and the care and services good.

We inspected Alliston Road on 15 & 16 September 2015. This was an unannounced inspection. At the last inspection in December 2014 we found breaches of the legal requirements. This was because risk assessments and care plans were not always up to date and information was missing. There were poor arrangements in place for the management of medicines. Meaningful engagement and interaction and activities were not available to people. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and that they now met the previous legal beaches.

Alliston Road provides accommodation for up to 43 older people who have dementia care needs. There were 35 people living at the home when we visited. There was a registered manager at the service at the time of 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.

The experiences of people who lived at the home were positive. People told us they felt safe living at the home, staff were kind and the care they received was good. We found staff had a good understanding of their responsibility with regard to safeguarding adults.

People’s needs were assessed and their preferences identified as much as possible across all aspects of their care. Risks were identified and there were plans in place to monitor and reduce risks. People had access to relevant health professionals when they needed them. Medicines were stored and administered safely.

Staff undertook training and received one to one supervision to help support them to provide effective care. The registered manager and staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). MCA and DoLS is law protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves or whom the state has decided their liberty needs to be deprived in their own best interests. People told us they liked the food provided and we saw people were able to choose what they ate and drank.

People’s needs were assessed and met in a personalised manner. We found that care plans were in place which included information about how to meet a person’s individual and assessed needs. The service had a complaints procedure in place and we found that complaints were investigated and where possible resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant.

The service had a clear management structure in place with clear lines of accountability. Staff told us the service had an open and inclusive atmosphere and senior staff were approachable and accessible. The service had various quality assurance and monitoring mechanisms in place. These included surveys, audits and staff and resident meetings.