This inspection took place on the 1st August 2017 and was unannounced.

Gabriel Court provides accommodation and personal care for older people, including people living with dementia and who have physical and mental health needs. The service can accommodate up to 44 people. At the time of our inspection there were 43 people living at the home.

At the last inspection, in August 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

People were treated with respect, kindness and empathy; they had developed positive relationships with the staff that were caring. People had detailed personalised care plans in place which enabled staff to provide consistent care and support in line with people’s personal preferences.

People continued to receive safe care. Staff were appropriately recruited and there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. People were 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 on-going professional development that they required to work effectively in their roles. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.

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 home supported this practice. There were a variety of activities available for people to participate in if they wished to.

The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The registered manager and provider were committed to develop the service and actively looked at ways to improve the service. There were effective quality assurance systems and audits in place; action was taken to address any shortfalls.

People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the registered manager had implemented effective systems to manage any complaints that they may receive.

During this inspection on 15 October 2013 we spoke with the owner, a cleaning staff and two care staff. We did not speak to any people that used the service.

Care staff we spoke with told us that they had undertaken a thorough cleaning of the home since our last inspection. The cleaner told us, ‘’We now have a revised programme that makes sure the home gets a thorough clean at least once every month.’’

The owner told us that the home had its own deep cleaning equipment and had a dedicated person to operate this equipment.

The provider had taken adequate steps to ensure the home was clean and we found all areas of the home clean.

When we visited the provider told us that they did not carry out diagnostic and screening procedures or treatment of disease, disorder or injury. We have advised the provider to have these regulated activities removed if there is no intention to provide these.

During our inspection we spoke with five people who used the service, four visitors and three members of care staff. We found that people had received care that was appropriate to their personal needs. A person who used the service said, ‘’All my needs are taken care of. They help me with everything. A visitor told us, ‘’My relative is looked after well. I like the care staff very much because they are very caring and attentive.’’

A health care professional who visited the home regularly said, ‘’We work very closely with the care team here and they are attentive towards people’s needs and work with us closely in maintaining their health needs.’’

People's care plans were detailed and took account of their individual needs. We found that the provider had made the improvements we asked them to make at our last inspection on 14 December 2012 and had made sure that the immediate needs of people who came to live at the home more recently had been assessed and met in a timely way.

We found that the provider needed to make improvements to the way the home was cleaned and maintained.

The provider had adequate quality assurance systems to ensure the safety and comfort of people who lived at the home.

When we visited the provider told us that they did not carry out diagnostic and screening procedures or treatment of disease, disorder or injury. We have advised the provider to have these regulated activities removed if there is no intention to provide these.

Residents and relatives were very positive about the care and support provided at Gabriel Court. Their comments included:

“Staff treat me with respect”, “I go out when I want to, staff just ask me to tell them when I am going out.” “I always have someone to chat to”.

“I get all the help I need”, “I have to have a special diet and staff make sure that I have what I need”. “I know my mum is well looked after”.

Residents told us that they felt safe and one commented: “I feel safe here, if there is a problem it is always dealt with”.

This inspection took place on the 1st August 2017 and was unannounced.

Gabriel Court provides accommodation and personal care for older people, including people living with dementia and who have physical and mental health needs. The service can accommodate up to 44 people. At the time of our inspection there were 43 people living at the home.

At the last inspection, in August 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

People were treated with respect, kindness and empathy; they had developed positive relationships with the staff that were caring. People had detailed personalised care plans in place which enabled staff to provide consistent care and support in line with people’s personal preferences.

People continued to receive safe care. Staff were appropriately recruited and there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. People were 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 on-going professional development that they required to work effectively in their roles. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.

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 home supported this practice. There were a variety of activities available for people to participate in if they wished to.

The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The registered manager and provider were committed to develop the service and actively looked at ways to improve the service. There were effective quality assurance systems and audits in place; action was taken to address any shortfalls.

People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the registered manager had implemented effective systems to manage any complaints that they may receive.