Norway Lodge is a privately owned care home that provides residential and nursing care. It is situated in Prenton on the Wirral and is a large detached house with large gardens. It is registered to provide care for up to 29 people in single and shared rooms, some with en-suite facilities. At the time of this inspection 29 people were living in the home.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People living at the home told us they were happy, well cared for and felt safe. Relatives visiting the home said that they were very happy with the care provided.

We saw that staff had been recruited safely with appropriate checks, including appropriate registration checks for nursing staff. We saw that staff were appropriately trained to support people with their needs. Staffing levels were observed to be sufficient to meet the needs of people who lived at the home.

We found on speaking to staff that they were knowledgeable about support needs of people in their care. We observed staff interacting with people throughout our inspection visit and saw that people looked relaxed and comfortable in the care of staff supporting them.

The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We found that the appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) applications had been submitted to the Local Authority in relation to people’s care.

We found the home to be a clean and safe. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required.

We saw that medication procedures at the home were safe and staff responsible for the administration of medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required.

The home had personalised care plans and risk assessments for people living at the home, these had been regularly reviewed and updated. We found people had access to healthcare professionals when health needs were identified.

People who used the service and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint, there were no complaints at the time of inspection. People and their relatives knew who the registered manager was and felt comfortable if they had to raise any issues.

People told us they were happy with the variety and choice of food available to them and we saw that the food looked tasty and appetising at mealtimes.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

We inspected this service on 24 November 2014.

The home provides residential and nursing care to up to 29 people and there were 27 people resident at the time of this inspection. The people who lived in the home were older adults with various disabilities and conditions.

The home was situated at the head of a quiet cul-de-sac and was a mature, detached building over three floors, with its own garden. There was a passenger lift and most of the bedrooms were on the first and second floors, with the communal areas and the manager’s office on the ground floor. The home had a homely feel and was clean. We saw evidence of the home having the normal decorative touches of a domestic home which made the environment feel welcoming.

The home required 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. The current registered manager had been in post at Norway Lodge for several years.

We found that people who used the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. They were able to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. We observed and were told that people were treated with dignity and respect.

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies.

The premises were suitable, safe and adequately maintained. Risk assessments and safety checks were undertaken. However we found that premises risk assessments were in need of review and update as this had not been done in the previous year.

Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse. Staff we spoke with were clear about how to report any concerns and were confident that any allegations made would be fully investigated to ensure people were protected.

Staff employed at the home were suitable, appropriately qualified and experienced. We found that appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work and there were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

On the day of the inspection there was a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the home and we saw staff interacted with people in a friendly and respectful manner. Throughout the day we saw staff interacting with people who lived at the home in a caring and professional way. We saw a member of staff supporting two people to complete a puzzle. Staff were seen chatting happily and laughing with people, together.

People who were unable to verbally express their views appeared comfortable with the staff who supported them. We saw people smiling and touching staff when they were approached.

We saw evidence of suitable quality monitoring systems in place and there was evidence that learning from incidents/events took place and appropriate changes were implemented.

We found that people who used the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. They were able to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. We observed and were told that people were treated with dignity and respect.

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies.

The environment was suitably, safe and adequately maintained. Risk assessments and safety checks were undertaken. However we found that risk assessments were in need of review and update.

Staff employed at the home were suitable, appropriately qualified and experienced. We found that appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work and there were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

We saw evidence of suitable quality monitoring systems in place and there was evidence that learning from incidents/events took place and appropriate changes were implemented.

We spoke to people who use the service and family members when we visited. Overall they told us they were very satisfied with the service provided at the home. They told us they were involved in care and treatment choices and their preferences were taken into account. One person told us he was very happy when a manager asked him what his favourite titbits were and later gave him several packets of them to enjoy.

We were told “They do everything well here”, “I am happy here and have no complaints”,

We were told by relatives staff always listened to their relative or themselves and took their views into account. They were able to have their say and input into the care of their relative. They confirmed they had seen care plans and had signed agreement to them. People told us they were always respected and their dignity and privacy maintained especially when having personal care needs attended to.