Golden Years care home is situated in a residential area of Blackpool, close to local amenities and provides accommodation for 21 older people. Communal space and personal bedroom accommodation is comfortable. There are three lounge areas and a separate dining room. Aids and adaptations have been provided to meet the needs of people. There is a lift for ease of access between the two floors. The gardens areas are accessible to people and seating is provided. At the time of the inspection visit 21 people lived at the home.

There was a registered manager in place who was also the owner. 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.

At the last inspection in October 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection, we found the service remained ‘Good’.

People told us staff were caring towards them. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of high standards of care to give people meaningful lives.

We found there was a sufficient staff workforce during our inspection visit. They were trained and able to deliver care in a compassionate and patient manner.

Staff we spoke with confirmed they did not commence in post until the management team received relevant checks. We checked staff records and noted employees received training appropriate to their roles. One staff member told us, “Very good I did some shadowing first and this is the best care home I have worked in.”

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. Care records showed they were reviewed and any changes had been recorded.

We looked around the building and found it had been maintained, was clean and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required.

Medication care plans and risk assessments provided staff with a good understanding about specific requirements of each person who lived at Golden Years. In addition staff had relevant training and competency testing to assist them in the safe administration of medicines.

Staff wore protective clothing such as gloves and aprons when needed. This reduced the risk of cross infection. We found supplies were available for staff to use when required such as hand gels.

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.

We only received positive comments about the quality of meals provided. Comments received included, “Yes the food is very good and plenty of choice.” We observed when we arrived at breakfast time people had breakfast in the dining room and in their own bedroom. People told us it was their choice.

We observed only positive interactions between staff and people who lived at Golden Years. There was a culture on promoting dignity and respect towards people. People who lived at the home told us staff treated them as individuals and delivered person centred care that was centred on them as an individual. Care plans seen confirmed this.

There was a complaints procedure which was made available to people on their admission to the home and their relatives. People we spoke with told us they were happy and had no complaints.

The management team used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits, staff meetings and daily discussions with people who lived at the home to seek their views about the service provided. In addition annual surveys were carried out for people who lived at Golden Years and their relatives. The last survey in October 2017 produced only positive comments about the service and

This inspection visit took place on 13 October 2015 and was unannounced.

At the last inspection on May 2013 the service was meeting the requirements of the regulations that were inspected at that time.

Golden Years care home is registered to accommodate up to 21 people. It is situated in a residential area of Blackpool, close to local amenities. Accommodation comprises of three lounge areas and a separate dining room. There are 15 single rooms and three shared rooms. Most are en-suite. There is a lift for ease of access between the two floors. The garden areas are accessible to people and seating is provided. At the time of our inspection visit there were 20 people who lived at the home.

The registered provider was an individual who also managed the home on a day to day basis. Registered providers 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.

Risks to people had been minimised because the registered provider had procedures in place to protect them from abuse and unsafe care. People told us they felt safe and cared for at Golden Years. One person said, “I certainly am safe here. I couldn’t be safer.” Another person commented, “I am very happy, love the staff, they are never rude or unkind.”

We looked at how the home was being staffed. Staff had worked in the home for a long time and were familiar with the individual needs and behaviours of people. We saw there were enough staff on shifts to provide safe care. People we spoke with were satisfied with staffing levels. One person said, “The staff we have are great and don’t keep me waiting when I call for them.” Another person said, “The staff are smashing, always ready to give you a hand. They are always about when you need them.”

There had not been any recent staff appointments as all staff had been in post for a long time. However the registered provider explained the processes they would follow when recruiting staff, to reduce any risks of employing unsuitable staff.

Staff managed medicines competently. They were given as prescribed and stored and disposed of correctly. People were able to manage their own medicines if they were able to do so safely. People told us they felt staff gave them their medicines correctly and when they needed them.

People told us the home was always clean, tidy and fresh smelling and they were pleased with the standard of hygiene in place. One person said, “It is so lovely here and everywhere looks smart and clean.” Another person told us “It is like a hotel, absolutely beautiful and so clean.”

People were offered a choice of healthy and nutritious meals. Staff made sure people’s dietary and fluid intake was sufficient for good nutrition. People told us the food and drinks were plentiful and there was a good variety. One person said, “I love the food and we get drinks all the time.” Another person told us, “The food is good and I can always get a change if I don’t like the main meal.”

People’s health needs had been met and any changes in health managed in a timely manner. One person told us, “They check everything is alright with me. If I am not well they get the doctor for me and look after me.” A relative said, “I am confident that the staff look after [my family member] and know when she is not 100%.”

Staff had been trained and had the skills and knowledge to provide support to people they cared for. The staff we spoke with told us they had good access to training and were encouraged to develop their skills and knowledge. Most staff had completed or were working towards national qualifications in care.

The management team had procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We spoke with staff to check their understanding of these. They understood and had followed procedures where people lacked capacity to make sure decisions were in people’s best interests.

People we spoke with told us the way in which the staff treated them was very good, wonderful, or excellent. We saw good interactions and communication between staff, people who lived at the home and their relatives. People were not left without support and staff were attentive and patient. They felt they could trust staff, who were friendly and respected their privacy. One person said, “Lovely, lovely staff so kind, so friendly, I wouldn’t like to be anywhere else.”

Staff supported people to engage in activities and interests in the home and short trips out in the local community. People told us they also enjoyed chatting with staff. One person told us they had been lonely and depressed at home as they lived alone, they added, “I have made a few friends here and I enjoy most days”

Staff were welcoming to people’s friends and relatives. One person told us, “My family can come at any time.” A relative said, “I am always made very welcome and am offered more than enough drinks while I am here.”

People told us they knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint if they were unhappy with something. They said if they had any concerns staff would listen to them and take action to improve things. One person said, “No one could grumble here. The staff are great.”

There were procedures in place to monitor the quality of the service. People felt their needs and wishes were met and they could talk with the registered provider and staff team at any time. They told us they felt well supported and cared for and staff were very approachable.

We spoke individually with the provider, senior carer and staff at Golden Years. We also spoke with a relative and three people receiving care at the home. We asked people to tell us about their experiences of living at the service. We reviewed care records, policies and procedures, audits and risk assessment documentation.

One relative told us, “I cannot fault the care – staff are very respectful. Emma, the senior carer, organises things very well”. One person said, “I feel safe and staff are very caring”.

The service demonstrated good practice that ensured people were safeguarded from abuse. Additionally, if the need arose, people understood the process for making a complaint. Care practice and record-keeping was underpinned by clear, regular auditing procedures.

Staffing levels were sufficient for the number of people living in the home. We observed that staff were able to provide personal care in a respectful, timely and unhurried way.

We saw that staff were respectful and considerate to people living at the home. Staff explained what they were doing and why, allowing time for the person to understand, such as when assisting people in the dining room during lunch. Staff were patient when offering choices and did not rush for a quick reply.

People told us that they felt their privacy, dignity and independence was respected and that staff were very kind and caring. When asked one person said that she always felt comfortable when staff were assisting her with personal care tasks describing staff as, “Kind and helpful”. Another person told us, “I do things for myself but I get help when I need it. I never feel uncomfortable. I don’t know what I was bothered about”. Another person said, “I get up when I want to, it is usually about 11:00am”.

People spoken with gave positive feedback about the service and the qualities of the staff team. People felt confident that staff understood their individual needs and requirements and were able to meet them very well. One person told us, “Staff do things in the way I want and do what I want”. This same person also said, “They know what they are doing and get on with it very well”. Another person when asked what staff did well said, “The care”.

People living at the home spoke very highly of the staff team and the care and support provided. We were told that staff were, “Very kind and helpful, some very nice girls and they like a laugh. I am very satisfied with everything”. Staff spoke positively about the training provided.

We were given general feedback about staff and the registered manager being very approachable, kind and helpful. One person told us that she felt listened to and had a good relationship with the staff team.