This inspection was announced and took place on 10 and 11 October 2018. 50 Broadfields 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. This was the service’s first inspection since registration.

50 Broadfields is a small residential home for two people. The home was a detached bungalow with a garden. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

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 received their medicines as prescribed however improvement was required to make sure medicines were stored safely and signed in accurately. There were detailed medicines profiles recording all medicines prescribed and reasons for prescribing. Staff had ‘as required’ (PRN) protocols in place to guide them on when to administer this type of medicine.

Recruitment required improvement to ensure that a full employment history was always obtained and any gaps in employment explored. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed.

Quality monitoring systems were not robust as the provider did not have oversight of improvement required. Accidents and incidents had not been analysed to identify patterns or trends. People’s feedback had been sought but the provider had not used it to evaluate and make improvements.

Where risks had been identified there were risk management plans in place which were reviewed regularly. Care plans were person-centred and reviewed regularly. People’s health needs were assessed and support given to access healthcare professionals.

People received care and support from staff who had the skills needed. Staff had been trained and had been able to have formal supervision. Whilst staff felt supported we have made a recommendation about the recording of staff supervision.

People knew how to complain if needed. People were involved in planning their own care and support. They were supported to develop and maintain independence and access their local community when they wished.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff had been trained and understood the general requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

The premises were adapted to meet people’s needs and kept very clean. Staff were aware of how to reduce the risks of infection and cross contamination. People had their own rooms and had been encouraged to personalise them.

Staff knew people well, we observed positive interactions between people and staff. People told us they liked living at the service and they could have visitors when they wished. Staff promoted people’s privacy and dignity and respected people’s rights.

There was an open and positive culture at the service. Staff enjoyed working for the provider and felt valued.

We have found one breach of the Regulations. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.