This inspection took place on 5 October 2017 and was unannounced. This meant the staff and the provider did not know we would be visiting. Field View was last inspected by CQC on 10 August 2015 and was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service continued to be Good.

The home had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC 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.

Field View provides care and accommodation for up to 36 older people and people with a dementia type illness. On the day of our inspection there were 34 people using the service.

Accommodation is provided across one level. Facilities included several lounges, a dining room, communal bathrooms, shower rooms and toilets, hairdressing room, coffee shop, sweet shop and a communal garden. The general reception was spacious with a comfortable seated area.

We saw that entry to the premises was controlled by key-pad entry and all visitors were required to sign in.

The layout of the building provided adequate space for people with walking aids or wheelchairs to mobilise safely around the home and was suitably designed for people with dementia type conditions.

The provider had procedures in place for managing the maintenance of the premises.

People who used the service and their relatives were complimentary about the standard of care at Field View. We saw staff supporting and helping to maintain people’s independence. People were encouraged to care for themselves where possible.

People were treated with respect and the staff understood how to provide care in a dignified manner and respected people’s right to privacy.

The staff knew the care and support needs of people well and took an interest in people and their relatives to provide individual personal care.

Staff had completed training in safeguarding of vulnerable adults and knew the different types of abuse and how to report concerns. Thorough investigations had been carried out in response to safeguarding incidents or allegations.

The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant checks when they employed staff. There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people using the service.

Staff were properly supported to provide care to people who used the service through a range of mandatory and specialised training, supervision and appraisal.

The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty were being met. All the care records we looked at contained evidence of consent.

People were protected against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medicines.

People had access to food and drink throughout the day and we saw staff supporting people to eat and drink at meal times when required. People’s weight and nutrition was closely monitored.

People had access to a range of activities in the home and within the local community.

All the care records we looked at showed people’s needs were assessed. Care plans and risk assessments were in place where required and daily records were up to date. Care plans were written in a person centred way and they were reviewed regularly.

Staff used a range of assessment tools and kept clear records about how care was to be delivered. People who used the service had access to healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support.

The provider had a complaints policy and procedure in place and complaints were fully investigated. Staff we spoke with told us they felt able to approach the registered manager and felt safe to report concerns.

The provider had a robust quality assurance system in pl

This inspection took place on 10 August 2015 and was unannounced. This meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

Field View provides care and accommodation for up to 36 older people and people with a dementia type illness. On the day of our inspection there were 32 people using the service.

The home had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Field View was last inspected by CQC on 10 June 2013 and was compliant.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant checks when they employed staff.

Thorough investigations had been carried out in response to safeguarding incidents or allegations.

Medicines were administered appropriately and people received their medicines at the time they needed them.

Staff training was up to date and staff received regular supervisions and appraisals, which meant that staff were properly supported to provide care to people who used the service.

The home was clean, spacious and suitable for the people who used the service.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) are part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They aim to make sure that people in care homes, hospitals and supported living are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom. We discussed DoLS with the registered manager and looked at records. We found the provider was following the requirements in the DoLS.

All of the care records we looked at contained consent to people’s care and treatment.

People who used the service, and family members, were complimentary about the standard of care at Field View.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

We saw that the home had a full programme of activities in place for people who used the service.

Care records showed that people’s needs were assessed before they moved into Field View and care plans were written in a person centred way.

The provider had a complaints policy and procedure in place and complaints were fully investigated.

The provider had a robust quality assurance system in place and gathered information about the quality of their service from a variety of sources.

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time of inspection.

As part of this scheduled inspection we followed up on a compliance action set at the previous inspection in November 2012. We found improvements had been made in this area.

People told us they had been asked for and provided written consent prior to receiving care or treatment. One person said “They (the staff) do everything right. They don’t take any advantage (of you).” They also said if there was anything they didn’t understand, the staff would explain it to them.

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.

People said they were happy with the care and support they received at Field View. One person told us "The staff’s good – they look after you. A nurse (carer) walks with me, just the one, to help me keep my balance.” Another person said “I’m very happy here, very content. It was my birthday at the weekend and the staff came in and sang for me – it made my day.” Other comments included “You can ask them (the staff) anything, and they’ll come and help you” and “I’m quite content.”

We found people received their medicines when they needed them. One person said “They (the staff) stand with me to make sure I swallow them (my tablets)” and “I’m always given my tablets, morning and evening.”

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

We spoke with a number of people who used the services at Field View. One person said "I’d heard it was nice here and that they looked after you well” when we asked them why they had chosen to live at Field View. Other people we spoke with indicated to us they were happy to be living there; comments included “I’m very comfortable here” and “It’s alright, canny good here.”

People told us they were happy with the care and support they were receiving. One person told us "We are well looked after here. It’s a good place to be” and another person said “It’s alright, they look after you well.” Although people told us they felt well looked after, other evidence did not always support this. We saw some of the actions set out in people’s care plans had not been carried out.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. One person said "Staff – they are really nice" and "If you want anything, they’ll get it for you." Other comments made by people who used the services included "They (the staff) are a very good crew" and "These nurses (this is how this person referred to the staff) are very good." Everybody we spoke with told us they felt safe at Field View and with the care staff employed by the service.

People said they were aware of the complaints system. One person said "If I wanted to complain, I’d speak to the staff here." All of the people we spoke with said they hadn't had any reason to complain.