This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 9 and 10 October 2018. This is the first inspection since the provider registered with the Commission in October 2017.

White Pearl Residential Care is registered to provide accommodation and residential care for up to 18 people with a variety of mental health needs, including conditions such as paranoid schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder and substance misuse. At the time of the inspection, 14 people were living at the home. Communal areas include a large sitting room with dining area and access to extensive rear gardens. There is also a quiet lounge and a designated smoking area. All rooms are of single occupancy and have en-suite facilities. A lift is available for people if required. White Pearl Residential Care is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided and both were looked at during this inspection.

A registered manager was 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.

Some aspects of medicines were not managed safely. Gaps in the completion of some Medication Administration Records (MAR) meant that one person may not have received their medicines on two occasions as prescribed. MAR had not always been completed accurately by staff or in line with National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines. The recording of one medicine had not been done as legally required. Medicines were not audited to check that medicine administration worked effectively and any issues could be identified and addressed.

Staff said they completed training in safeguarding adults at risk, but some staff did not have a full understanding of the subject or how to keep people safe. We have made a recommendation about safeguarding training for staff. Staff had completed training in a number of areas, but there was no formal training plan to confirm that staff had completed the training they required. Staff were encouraged to study for vocational qualifications in health and social care.

Systems or processes had not been established to assess or monitor the service provided to people. Risk assessments were lacking in some areas, but there was no evidence to show this impacted on people's safety. Auditing systems had not been set up to monitor or measure the quality of care or to drive improvement. People’s feedback about the service had not been requested or documented formally.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Checks were made on new staff to ensure they were of good character and safe to work with people.

People were supported to have sufficient to eat and drink and had a choice of menu. They had access to a range of healthcare professionals and services. People’s rooms were personalised and they had access to outdoor space. The registered manager worked with a variety of organisations to deliver effective care. 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 supported this practice.

People were looked after by kind and caring staff who knew them well. Staff respected people’s privacy and supported them to be as independent as possible. People were encouraged to be involved in all aspects of their care.

Information within care plans was not detailed, but staff knew people well and how to support them. The deputy manager had plans to improve records in relation to care plans, risk assessments and to set up auditing systems. People pursued th