This inspection took place on 10 November 2016 and was unannounced. At the previous inspection of this service in November 2013 we found it was meeting all the regulations we looked at during that inspection.

Kallar Lodge is registered to provide accommodation and support with personal care for up to 37 older people living with dementia. The home is operated by the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham. At the time of our inspection 33 people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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 service had appropriate arrangements in place for safeguarding adults from the risk of abuse. Risk assessments were in place which included information about how to support people in a safe manner. There were enough staff working at the service and robust staff recruitment procedures were in place. Medicines were managed in a safe manner. However, we found a number of minor issues of concern relating to safety at the service.

Staff were well supported and received regular training and supervision. The service was operating within the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and people were able to make choices about their daily lives, including about what they ate and drank. People had routine access to health care professionals.

People told us they were treated with respect and in a caring manner by staff. The service promoted people’s independence and privacy. However, we found that bedroom doors were not personalised and did not promote orientation for people. We have made a good practice recommendation about this.

Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s individual needs. People were supported to engage in a variety of activities. The service had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

Staff spoke positively of the registered manager. The service had quality assurance and monitoring systems in place, some of which involved seeking the views of people that used the service.

We spoke with 10 people who used the service, seven family members, one visitor and six members of staff which included the registered manager. We observed people using the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). The people we spoke with told us they were happy with the care they had received. One person said, "I can’t fault the care given here, the girls are very kind and caring." Another person said, "I am pleased with my life here, they help me with things I can’t do. We saw that staff had a good rapport with people living in the home. We saw people enjoying activities and chatting with staff.

There were systems in place in place for obtaining informed consent from people who use the service. Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

We saw that all areas, including bedrooms and communal areas, were clean. No odours were evident. Staff had access to, and we saw they used personal protective equipment such as gloves, alcohol gel for cleaning hands and disposable plastic aprons. One person told us, "this place is first class and is always very clean."

We looked at staff files and saw that the service followed recruitment procedures and checked that new staff were suitable people to work in a care home.

People using the service said they could talk to staff or the manager if they had any concerns or complaints. They also felt confident that staff members would resolve their problem. One person said, "I would complain and I have and it was sorted out quickly."

People were treated with respect and their care and welfare needs were met. They were supported and encouraged to be as independent as possible. A person who used the service told us “it’s very nice here, I like it and I like the girls, they dance with me.” A relative said “they treat people properly and take good care of them." Another visitor told us “I can’t fault them. The staff are kind and patient. If she is not well they phone the doctor.”

Systems were in place to safeguarding people from abuse. One visitor said “we feel she is quite safe here.” In a quality survey a visiting professional had written “a safe and friendly house for people to be in.”

Staff received the training and support that they needed to carry out their duties and support people who used the service. A member of staff told us “I have had a lot of training over the time that I have been working for the borough and it is updated all the time as things change.”

The manager monitored the quality of the service to ensure that people were receiving a safe service that met their needs. The provider had not been regularly monitoring the service but the manager told us that a system had been introduced by which managers of the providers services would visit each others services to check the quality of care provided. We found that people who used the service and their relatives were asked for their opinions about the service and that, as far as possible, any issues raised were addressed.