This inspection took place on 4 March 2016 and was unannounced.

58 The Park Paling provides residential care for up to three people who have physical and learning disabilities. The service is a single story building, with bedrooms and communal areas located on the ground floor. At the time of our inspection, three people used the service.

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.

People’s care and support needs were met by staff who were knowledgeable and knew them well. Staff had been trained to meet the specific needs of people who lived at the home. Staff told us they were supported within their job roles.

Relatives told us Park Paling was a safe place to live and people were well cared for. Staff knew how to report any safeguarding concerns and how to keep people safe. The risks to people’s health and wellbeing were assessed and action taken to minimise any identified risk.

People received their medicines as prescribed, and checks were undertaken to ensure people received them in a safe way.

People were supported in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. The manager understood the importance applying for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLs) when necessary. Staff ensured they maintained people’s privacy and dignity, and treated people with compassion and respect.

There were enough staff to support people who lived in the home. Staff were available at the times people needed them. Recruitment checks were carried out prior to care workers starting work, to ensure their suitability to work with people.

People had a choice of meals which met their dietary requirements and preferences. People were supported to maintain their health, and referrals were made to healthcare professionals when necessary.

People had opportunities to pursue their hobbies and interests, and maintain relationships with people important to them.

People and their relatives knew how to raise complaints and were confident actions would be taken in response to these.

There were processes to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided and actions were taken to drive improvement in the service.

We saw that most people living at 58 Park Paling were unable to tell us about their experiences of the service. We therefore spoke with two family members and observed the care being provided to people. We also spoke with two members of staff and the manager who supported people.

Relatives told us consent was sought from them regarding their family member's planning of care.

Relatives we spoke with told us that the care that was discussed with them matched the care that was being provided to their family members. They also told us they were regularly kept up to date about the changes to their family member’s care.

We saw that the care plans were person centred and reflected people’s individual needs. We found the members of staff supported people as detailed within their care plans. We noted staff were compassionate and caring when supporting people. We found that staff had involved appropriate health professionals to review their support needs and help support that person.

We noted the home was clean and there was a cleaning schedule which staff followed. We saw checks were made to review the cleanliness of the home.

We saw the provider ensured that the appropriate checks were undertaken before a new member of staff was employed. The manager showed us the induction plan which new staff had to complete during their employment at 58 Park Paling.

We found the service was well led and had systems in place to monitor the quality of service being provided.

We saw there were three people living at 58 Park Paling and we spoke with one person about their experiences of the service. We spoke with a family member and observed the care being provided to people. We also spoke with two members of staff and the deputy manager who supported people.

A relative we spoke with told us that the care that was discussed with them matched the care that was being provided to their family member. They also told us they were regularly kept up to date about the changes to their family member’s care.

We saw that the care plans were person centred and reflected the people’s individual needs. We saw members of staff supported people as detailed within their care plans. We saw care plans were easy to read and had pictures to help people understand their care plan.

A relative we spoke with told us that staff were friendly and supported the needs of their family member well. We saw staff knew what people's care needs were and how they needed to be supported.

We spoke with the staff members about what they thought abuse was and they showed they had a good awareness of the importance of keeping people safe. They understood their responsibilities for reporting any concerns regarding potential abuse.

We saw the provider had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. We saw audits had been completed and analysed to identify where any areas of improvement might be required.