This unannounced inspection took place on 5 June 2018. The King William Care Home was registered by Care Quality Commission (CQC) on 22 December 2016 following a change in legal entity and this was the first time we had inspected this service.

The King William Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The King William Care Home provides care and support for up to 28 older people, some of who may be living with dementia. The premises had been adapted and consisted of two floors which included bedrooms, a main lounge, garden room, dining room and an activities room. There were 20 people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

There was no 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. However, there was a manager in post who was in the process of applying to become the registered manager.

We found that regular audits by the managers of the service had identified areas of the environment that needed attention to ensure that people’s needs were met by the adaptation, design and decoration of the service. Although the provider had carried out some improvements to the environment such as servicing and repairing equipment and on-going essential repairs such as fixing leaking taps and replacing toilet seats, they had failed to address the areas of concern identified in the environmental audits. During this inspection, we found the same issues in relation to the environment as identified by the audits. For example, we saw that some bedrooms had an unpleasant odour because carpets were stained and worn. In one bedroom there had been a leak and the carpet was wet and this room had a strong odour.

Both sluice rooms were in need of refurbishment. They were not easy to clean and walls and floors were stained. Several toilets needed new flooring, the laundry was not a clean and hygienic environment to wash people’s clothes and windows in many areas of the service had condensation in the pains obscuring peoples view to the outside.

People were safe at the service and staff knew how to protect them from abuse. Managers and staff monitored people’s well-being and took preventative action to keep them safe. There were enough staff on duty to support people and meet their needs. Staff supported people with their medicines and this was done safely. Staff were trained in infection control and wore PPE (personal protective equipment) to reduce the risk of the spread of infection or illness.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. The staff were well-trained and knowledgeable. Staff assisted people with their meals and made sure people had enough to eat and drink. People’s healthcare needs were met and staff referred them to healthcare professionals where necessary. People's consent was gained before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met. 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 support this practice

The staff were caring and kind and had developed good relationships with people using the service. They engaged with people and welcomed their relatives and friends when they visited. Staff respected people and supported them to make choices about their care, support and any individual needs they might have including cultural, religious, and those relating to disability. People told us staff treated them with di