This inspection took place on 13 October 2016 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 19 November 2013 the provider was meeting the legal requirements we inspected.

Western Mount Lodge is registered to provide accommodation for up to 18 adults with mental ill health who require nursing or personal care. There were 16 people living in the home at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People’s care was planned to meet their needs. Potential risks were identified and management plans were in place to guide staff on the best way to reduce the risks. Staff understood their role in protecting people from harm and poor care. There were recruitment procedures in place to ensure staff were suitable to work within a caring environment. People received their medicines because there were safe processes in place for storage, administration and stock control.

Staff received the training and support they required to care for people effectively. People were provided with a choice of nutritious food and plentiful drinks. Staff understood the importance of obtaining consent from people and supporting them with their decision making when required.

People were encouraged to improve their physical health and had access to healthcare professionals to support their mental and psychological needs. Staff had formed good relationships with people and provided kind and compassionate care which promoted people’s dignity and privacy. Relatives were kept informed about people’s care and were welcomed when they visited the home.

Staff knew people well and provided care which was regularly reviewed to ensure it met their preferences and needs. People were provided with a choice of activities and outings to prevent social isolation but staff respected their choice if they did not want to participate. People and their relatives were encouraged to raise concerns and complaints which were shared with staff as a learning opportunity.

Everyone thought the home was well managed and felt the registered manager and provider were approachable and keen to listen to the views of others. People were given opportunities to comment on the care they received. There were audits in place to monitor the quality of the service to drive improvements in care.

Western Mount is a care home with nursing, providing accommodation for 18 people. There were 15 people in residence when we visited, and one person was in hospital. The service provided care and support to adults who had enduring mental health needs.

The service had a registered manager in post. There were clear management structures offering support and leadership. This meant the home had a positive, empowering culture. Records showed that CQC had been notified, as required by law, of all the incidents in the home that could affect the health, safety and welfare of people.

People told us the staff understood them; they confirmed the staff were kind and thoughtful and treated them with respect. People spoke positively about the care and support delivered to them.

People using the service were consulted about the management of the service and could influence the service delivery.

There were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. People were protected against the risk of restraint because the provider had made suitable arrangements for staff to respond appropriately to people whose behaviour may challenge others.

People were supported to take informed risks to ensure they were not restricted and had the capacity to do so. The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 was being adhered to, to ensure staff made decisions based on people’s best interests. The Act was introduced to protect people who lack capacity to make certain decisions because of illness or disability.

The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People’s human rights were therefore properly recognised, respected and promoted.

The home environment was safe and well maintained. There were enough staff to support people safely and meet their needs.

The staff were kind and respectful to people when they were supporting them. There were policies, procedures and training in place to support staff to respect people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff were able to describe examples of where they had responded to what was important to individuals living in the home. People knew who to speak to if they wanted to raise a concern and there were processes in place for responding to concerns.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Action plans, in response to audits and incidents were followed up and ensured continuous improvement. Staff were supported to challenge when they felt there could be improvements, there was an open and transparent culture in the home.

People using the service told us they thought they received the right support. One person said “This is the best service in town” and another said “it’s good here”. The staff we spoke with knew what support individuals needed and respected the individuality of the people using the service. We saw people were able to access community facilities as well as participating in activities within the service and one person told us "We’ve done jewellery making and crafts”.

External professionals told us they were pleased with the service and one told us “I’m very impressed with how they care for people”.

Most people told us they liked the food, although one person said “The food could be better”. The serving of the lunch time meal was observed and people told us they enjoyed it. One person told us "The food is really nice" and another said "The meals are good".

We found the premises were clean and hygienic and staff knew how to prevent the spread of infection.

Records we saw were clear, legible and up to date and covered all aspects of running the service, such as the recruitment and training of staff and safety of the premises.

.

People told us they got on well with staff and that they were involved in reviews of their care and support. One person said “I like it here” and another told us they made the “right choice” when choosing the service. One person said “we get a choice” regarding the meals offered.

One person told us that the support they received was “very good” and they confirmed that appropriate advice and guidance was sought from health professionals. Another told us “staff are good”. Two people said “I feel safe”.

People we spoke with confirmed they knew how to make a complaint and one told us the manager “sorts things out”.