This inspection took place on 27 October and 03 November 2016. The visit on 27 October was unannounced and we arranged with the provider that we would return on 03 November to complete the inspection. The last inspection of the service was in February 2014 when the service was meeting all of the standards we inspected.

89a Hampton Road East is a care home for up to seven people with a learning disability. When we inspected, six people were using the service. The service had a registered manager who also managed another of the provider’s locations situated next door to the service.

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 provider had systems in place to support people safely and staff working in the service understood and implemented these. There were enough staff to support people safely and the provider carried out checks on new staff to make sure they were suitable to work in the service.

People’s care records showed they had been involved in planning their own care and support and had consented to this.

Staff had the training, support and information they needed to care for people.

The provider, registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty of Liberty Safeguards. Where restrictions were in place to keep people safe, this was done lawfully.

People received the support they needed to meet their healthcare needs. People received the medicines they needed safely.

People were supported by kind, respectful and polite staff. Support staff offered people choices about aspects of their daily lives and respected people's privacy.

The provider, registered manager and support staff assessed and recorded people’s individual care needs and based their support plans on these assessments. The provider’s care planning systems were centred on the individual. People’s support plans were personalised and gave support staff clear guidance about how to meet people’s identified needs.

People using the service, their relatives and other people were asked for their views on the service.

The registered manager had a good knowledge of all of the people who lived at the service including changes in their needs, their preferences and social history.

There was a welcoming and friendly atmosphere at the service.

The provider and registered manager undertook a range of audits and checks to monitor quality in the service and identify where they could make improvements.

We looked at the care records of two people and spoke with the manager. We also viewed an action plan and found that the provider had met their set targets to ensure that people`s care and treatment were planned to reflect their individual needs.

We looked at the care records of two people, spoke with one person and spoke with one member of staff and the operations manager. During our visit other people that lived at the home were enjoying a summer holiday and one person was in their room and chose not to talk to us.

We found people were involved in their care and they were able to carry out independent tasks such as cooking, washing and cleaning. They also had a range of activities to participate in and each person had their own individual timetable which was displayed in the home so they knew what was happening on each day. We found the service encouraged people to be active members of the community, for example people attended work placements and college.

We looked at care planning and risk assessments and found that people's care was not planned and delivered in accordance with their assessed needs. Where people displayed a particular behaviour or found it difficult to communicate with people in an acceptable manner there were no interventions in place for staff to manage these situations. This meant that people would often be told behaviours were inappropriate rather than be taught how to manage those behaviours in a more acceptable way.

People were protected from the risks of abuse because the provider had taken proper steps. People had received training in protecting people from abuse, they demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of abuse and knew what to do if they suspected a person was at risk or had been abused.

We looked at staffing levels in the home and found although the service was without a manager people were supported to carry on their role and they were suitably qualified and received detailed training relevant to the people they cared for.

The service carried out regular audits to ensure people were cared for appropriately and effectively. We found the audits were comprehensive and relevant to the service being provided.

During our visit we spoke to three people who use the service. They told us that they got good support which met their needs. They said that the staff were caring and respectful towards them.

People said they felt that the staff had the right skills and experience to support them with their needs.

People told us that being at the service helped them to increase their self-esteem and gain more independence in their life. They said that they felt supported by staff and that they led the lives they wanted to.