This inspection took place on 13 and 14 September 2016 and was unannounced. We last inspected the service in March 2014. At that inspection we found the service was compliant with the essential standards we inspected.

St Lukes and The Oaks Care Home is a care home without nursing that provides a service to up to 78 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. The accommodation is arranged over three units, with all rooms having ensuite toilet facilities. At the time of our inspection there were 71 people living at the service.

The service had a registered manager as required. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 registered manager was present and assisted us during this inspection.

People felt safe living at the service and were protected from abuse and risks relating to their care and welfare.

People were protected by recruitment processes and staff were well trained. Staff had the tools they needed to do their work and provide good quality care. Staff knew how to recognise the signs of abuse and were aware of actions to take if they felt people were at risk. People's medicines were stored and administered safely.

People received effective care and support from staff who knew them well. Staff training was up to date and staff felt they received the training they needed to carry out their work safely and effectively. People received support that was individualised to their personal preferences and needs. Their needs were monitored and care plans were reviewed six monthly or as changes occurred.

People received effective health care and support. They saw their GP and other health professionals when needed. Medicines were stored and handled correctly and safely. People's rights to make their own decisions, where possible, were protected. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to ensure people's rights to make their own decisions were promoted.

Meals were nutritious and varied. People told us they enjoyed the meals at the service and confirmed they were given choices.

People were treated with care and kindness. People's wellbeing was protected and all interactions observed between staff and people living at the service were respectful and friendly. People confirmed staff respected their privacy and dignity.

People and their relatives were aware of how to make a complaint and told us they would speak to the registered manager or one of the staff. They told us they could approach management and staff with any concerns and felt the management would listen and take action. People benefitted from living at a service that had an open and friendly culture and from a staff team that were happy in their work.

People were protected against environmental risks to their safety. Premises risk assessments and health and safety audits were carried out and issues identified dealt with quickly. Furniture and fixtures were of good quality and well maintained. The premises were well maintained with dementia friendly adaptations.

People and their relatives and visitors felt there was a good atmosphere and thought the service provided a comfortable, calm and homely atmosphere. Staff felt the service was well-managed. They told us the management was open with them and communicated what was happening at the service and with the people living there.

We reviewed staffing levels at this inspection, because of concerns raised with us. We found there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs.

At our last inspection on 26 July 2013, we identified concerns about the way the provider supported workers. This was because most staff had not attended recent safeguarding of vulnerable adults training. They had not receveid recent supervision or appraisal. At this inspection we found that all staff were being appropriately supported. Training, supervision and appraisals were all up to date.

We previously identified concerns about people’s personal records, because they were not kept securely. At this inspection we found appropriate action had been taken to ensure that people’s records were secure.

The provider reported applicable incidents as required by the regulations. This meant we could effectively monitor the quality and safety of care people who use the service received.

We spoke with seven people who use the service, four visitors, a visiting heath care professional and four members of staff. All of them gave us complimentary feedback about the home and the care they or their relatives received. All of the people who use the service and the visitors we spoke with praised the staff.

One visitor said “it’s like a sunny day every day. The staff are like sunshine”. We observed many occasions where staff demonstrated a caring and respectful approach to people who use the service. People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. Staff told us how they regularly reviewed plans of care and were knowledgeable of people's individual needs and how to meet those needs.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. We observed there were sufficient staff to meet the needs of people who use the service. We heard call bells being rung and noted they were always answered very quickly. One person we spoke with told us “if you fancy a drink you just buzz. You don’t have to wait long. They’ll bring you tea and biscuits anytime. [The staff are] a pretty good lot.”

We spoke with staff who told us they felt well supported by managers and they had enough training to enable them to meet the needs of the people they support. Staff were able, from time to time, to obtain further relevant qualifications. Some staff had National Vocational Qualifications (NVQ) and others were currently studying for diplomas in health and social care. Most of the provider's mandatory training was up to date. However, 65% of staff had not had recent training in safeguarding of vulnerable adults, 50% were not up to date with supervision and 70% with appraisals.

People’s personal records including medical records were accurate and fit for purpose and contained all the relevant information to enable staff to meet people’s care needs. Other records appropriate to the management of the service, for example risk assessments and health and safety checks were kept for the relevant period of time and then destroyed securely. However we noted that people’s care records were not stored securely and there was some confidential personal information on notice boards around the home.

The provider had not reported applicable incidents to us which concerned the provision of care and welfare to people who use the service. This meant we could not effectively monitor the safety and quality of services provided to people.

We visited the St Luke’s unit only during this inspection. We spoke with some of the people living at St Luke’s. One person told us “It’s very comfortable. I’m well looked after here”.

People told us they had been involved in assessing and planning how their care needs would be met and review of their records confirmed this. People were offered choices and supported to make decisions.

People said that they felt safe in the home and made positive comments about the support offered by the staff. A range of activities were provided but people had the choice whether they wished to take part or not.

People had been asked their views on the support provided in the home.

We spoke with some of the people living at St Lukes and The Oaks and their relatives. People told us they had been involved in assessing and planning how their care needs would be met. People were offered choices and supported to make decisions. People were complimentary about the staff and the support offered. We were told that a good range of activities were provided but they had the choice whether they wanted to take part or not.

People felt safe in the home and made positive comments about the support offered by the staff. People had been asked their views on the support provided in the home. They felt that if an issue was raised it was properly addressed.