76 Canute Road is a care home providing social and residential care for up to six people with learning disabilities. On the day of our inspection there were six people living in the home. People had varied needs related to their learning disabilities. Some had more specialist needs associated with Autism and epilepsy. People who lived at the service were adults below the age of sixty five years old. People had different communication needs. Some people had limited verbal communication, and other people used gestures and body language to make their needs known. The provider runs four other care homes locally.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 11 December 2018 and was announced. The service had a 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. The registered manager was also the manager of four other homes locally.

People’s needs were effectively met because staff had the specialist training and skills they needed to meet people’s complex needs. Staff attended regular supervision meetings and received an annual appraisal of their performance. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible. People were encouraged to make decisions and choices. They 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.

Staff had a very good understanding of the care and support needs of people and had developed positive relationships with them. People were supported to attend health appointments, such as the GP or dentist and where appropriate professionals visited them at Canute Road. People had enough to eat and drink and menus were varied and well balanced.

People were observed to be relaxed and content in their surroundings and there was warm and friendly atmosphere in the home. People were supported to take part in a variety of activities to meet their individual needs and wishes. This included trampolining, aromatherapy, art sessions, walks, gym, bowling, computer time, visits to local restaurants, cinema, theatres and shops.

There were enough staff who had been appropriately recruited, to meet people’s individual needs. Staff knew people well and had a good understanding of the actions to take to mitigate risks and provide a safe environment for people to live. Staff understood what they needed to do to protect people from the risk of abuse. Incidents and accidents were well managed and lessons were learned to pre-empt and avoid similar occurrences. People’s medicines were managed safely.

The provider visited Canute Road regularly and had effective systems to monitor the management and quality

This inspection took place on 18 February 2016. This inspection was announced. 48 hours’ notice of the inspection was given because the service is small and the registered manager may be out of the office. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

This location is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to a maximum of six people with adults with complex needs within the autistic spectrum. Five people lived at the service at the time of our inspection and one person used the service for respite purposes. Some people could communicate using words and short sentences. Some people had non-verbal communication skills. We talked directly with people and used observations to better understand people's needs.

The home had a 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.

Staffing levels were adequate and were flexibly deployed to ensure people received appropriate support at all times to meet their individual needs.

Staff were trained in how to protect people from abuse and harm. Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to raise an alert if they had any concerns.

Risk assessments were centred on the needs of the individual. Each risk assessment included clear control measures to reduce identified risks to each individual and guidance for staff to follow to make sure people were protected from harm.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to identify how the risks of reoccurrence could be reduced. Staff had analysed behavioural incidents and put in place structured activities for people where it had been identified they may experience behaviours which challenge. This had reduced the frequency of incidents and enhanced people’s quality of life.

There were safe recruitment procedures in place which included the checking of references.

Medicines were stored and administered safely and correctly. Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. Staff had received training in the MCA and how to implement this in practice. DoLS assessments were in place to ensure people were lawfully deprived of their liberty.

Staff received on-going training and supervision to monitor their performance and professional development. The registered manager had ensured that staff had access to relevant training that met their learning needs. Staff actively sought and were supported to undertake additional training. This enabled them to further develop people’s independence levels and improve their quality of life through use of enhanced communication methods and Positive Behaviour Support (PBS).

Staff responded to people’s individual needs and support people to meet their individual goals and aspirations. People’s needs and personal preferences had been assessed. Person centred activities were provided to people based on their individual needs and preferences. People’s care plans had been regularly reviewed to ensure they were up-to-date and met people’s individual needs.

The provider had obtained people’s feedback and feedback from relatives and key stakeholders to develop and improve the service.

Staff supported people to have meals that met their needs and choices. Staff knew about and provided for people’s dietary preferences and needs.

Staff were committed to providing a high standard of care to people. Staff communicated effectively with people, responded to their needs promptly, and treated people with kindness and respect. People’s privacy was respected and people were assisted in a way that respected their dignity.

People were

When we visited we met three of the six people living in the house. The limited communication skills and anxieties of the people we met with, meant that they were unable to engage in conversations about their experience of living in the house. However, we observed staff familiar with their communication needs, engaging with them and offering opportunities for them to make choices and decisions in regard to their daily routines. We met the manager and three staff speaking with two staff in depth. We also reviewed a range of supporting documentation detailing how care was delivered and monitored.