Flowers House is a sheltered housing with care scheme, registered to provide personal care support for older people who have a diagnosis of dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 33 people receiving care and support. At the last inspection, in July 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

People continued to receive safe care. Staff were appropriately recruited and there were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs. People were consistently protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.

The care that people received continued to be effective. Staff had access to the support, supervision, training and ongoing professional development that they required to work effectively in their roles. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.

People developed positive relationships with staff, who were caring and treated people with respect, kindness and courtesy. People had personalised plans of care in place to enable staff to provide consistent care and support in line with people’s personal preferences. People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the provider had implemented effective systems to manage complaints.

The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The registered manager was a visible role model in the service. People, their relatives and staff told us that they had confidence in the manager’s ability to provide managerial oversight and leadership to the service. Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service.

Flowers House is registered to provide support for older people who require personal care, and have a diagnosis of dementia, in their own homes. On the day of our visit, there were 31 people receiving care and support.

The inspection was announced and took place on 10 July 2015.

The service had a registered manager. 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 were protected from abuse and felt safe. Staff were knowledgeable about the risks of abuse and knew how to respond appropriately to any concerns to keep people safe.

Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and were detailed clearly within people’s care plans. Staff used these to assist people to remain as independent as possible

There were appropriate numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service. Safe and effective recruitment practices were followed.

Systems were in place to ensure that medicines were administered and handled safely.

Staff received on-going training. They were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities and had the skills and experience required to support people with their care needs.

We found that, where people lacked capacity to make their own decisions, consent had been obtained in line with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005.

People’s nutritional needs had been assessed and they were supported to make choices about their food and drink if this was an assessed part of their package of care.

People were supported to attend health appointments when required and to see health and social care professionals as and when required. Prompt action was taken in response to illness or changes in people’s physical and mental health.

Staff treated people with kindness, respect and compassion and cared for them according to their individual needs.

Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and people were involved in making decisions about their care.

People told us their needs were met and they were supported to take part in meaningful activities and pursue hobbies and interests.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and preferences and we received positive feedback from relatives about the service provided by staff.

People knew how to make a complaint if they needed to, and were confident that the service would listen to them. The registered manager investigated and responded to people’s complaints in accordance with the provider’s complaints procedure.

We saw that people were encouraged to have their say about how the quality of services could be improved and were positive about the leadership provided by the manager. We found that a system of audits, and reviews were also used to good effect in monitoring performance and managing risks.

The service benefitted from good leadership and staff were positive in their desire to provide good quality care for people. The registered manager demonstrated a clear vision and set of values based on person centred care and independence.

We spoke with six people that used the service who all told us they were happy with the care that they received. When asked about the service they received one person told us “I’m very happy”. Another person told us “All of the staff are very nice”.

We spoke with five relatives of people that used the service. They were all happy with the service their relatives received. One relative told us “The care is really good, and all of the carers know (my relative) well.” Another relative told us “The staff can’t do enough to help you and they’re flexible to meet our needs”.

We spoke with four staff members who all told us that they felt well supported on their roles and that they received regular supervisions.

We found that people’s needs had been assessed and they had care and support plans in place that included their preferences and ensured that their needs would be met. We saw that risk assessments had been carried out and control measures had been put in place to reduce the risks associated with their care.

We found that there was a detailed safeguarding policy in place and staff had a sound understanding of their responsibilities under the policy. We saw that annual appraisals had been carried out. We found that the provider carried out surveys to obtain feedback about the service and we saw evidence items that the provider had acted upon following feedback received.