About the service: Aahana House provides support with personal care and mental health needs for up to 13 adults in one adapted building. At the time of our visit there were nine people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

The provider took steps to help people feel safe and there were systems to protect people from abuse. There were risk management plans to keep people safe from avoidable harm and the provider checked the premises were safe, clean and suitably adapted to meet people’s needs. Staff had opportunities to learn when things went wrong and the provider took action to prevent incidents from happening again.

There were enough staff to support people safely and the provider carried out checks to make sure staff they recruited were suitable.

People received their medicines as prescribed. There were systems to ensure medicines were stored and administered safely.

People’s care was based on evidence based guidance and assessments of their needs carried out in consultation with other providers who were involved with people’s care. People had access to healthcare services as needed. People were provided with enough to eat and drink.

Staff had the support they needed to provide care effectively, but did not have training in supporting people with specific mental health conditions. The registered manager said they would look into this.

People were supported to have choice in their daily lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff gained people’s consent before providing care to them.

People told us they got on well with staff. Staff knew people well and treated them with respect. Each person had a key member of staff assigned to them who supported them to express their views about how they wanted their care delivered. People were able to make choices about their daily routines.

Staff respected people’s privacy, dignity and independence. The service worked to support people in developing or regaining independent living skills.

People had personalised care plans that took into account their needs, wishes and preferences about how they wanted their care delivered. The service supported people to work towards their recovery and rehabilitation goals. People’s religious and cultural needs were met. People felt there was not enough to do and a good variety of structured activities was not always available. One person was unable to leave the home because the service could not currently meet their mobility support needs. However, the provider had plans to improve the provision of activities and we will check this at our next inspection.

People and staff had opportunities to discuss their care and feed back their views to management. This included daily conversations, questionnaires and regular meetings between people and staff. The provider used checks and audits to monitor the quality of the service and identify any improvements that might be needed. Although people were aware of the complaints procedure, they did not always feel the provider responded to their complaints. Records showed the provider followed their procedure but sometimes people needed to be reminded of what action they had taken.

Rating at last inspection: This was the first inspection at this service since its registration in February 2018.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the date of registration.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive. We will inspect in line with our inspection schedule or sooner if required.