This inspection took place on 20 July 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides domiciliary care services; we needed to be sure that someone would be in. Adlington House provides community support and personal care to people in their own homes within a retirement community. At the time of the inspection, 15 people were receiving a service from the provider.

At our last inspection the service was rated as good overall with requires improvement in the effective domain. This was because there was a breach of Regulation 13 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities), Regulations 2014. People had been restricted without the legal safeguards in place. At this inspection we found the provider was meeting all the legal requirements and had made all the required improvements. Staff understood how to ensure people’s rights were protected and we found legal safeguards were in place.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 support at the times they needed it and from consistent staff. People were supported by safely recruited staff that understood how to safeguard them from potential abuse and manage risks to their safety. People’s medicines were administered safely.

People told us staff had the skills required to support them. Staff had the knowledge to support people effectively and received updates to their training on a regular basis.

People 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.

People received support from staff to maintain a healthy diet and they told us staff enabled them to choose what they had to eat and drink. People received support to monitor their health and access health professionals when they needed to.

People had support from kind and caring staff, they told us staff were kind and polite. People were able to make choices about all aspects of their care and support and staff supported them to maintain their independence. Staff supported people in a way which maintained their privacy and dignity when providing care and support.

People were involved in their assessments and care planning and their needs were reviewed on a regular basis. Staff understood people’s preferences for how they wanted their care and support delivered. People and their relatives understood how to make a complaint and complaints were appropriately investigated and responded to.

The registered manager had systems in place to check the quality of the service people received. People told us the management team were approachable and they felt involved in the service. Staff were supported and felt they could influence change. People had opportunities to provide feedback about the quality of the service which led to improvements.

We inspected Adlington House Wolstanton on 7 April 2015. The provider is a domiciliary care service, registered to provide personal care to people living in a retirement community from which the provider operates. At the time of our inspection, seven people used the service.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The location was registered with us in July 2014 and had never been inspected before.

Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 requirements and the Court of Protection requirements were not always followed when people were restricted for their safety. The Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Court of Protection set out requirements that ensure decisions are made in people’s best interests when they are unable to do this for themselves.

People were protected from the risks of abuse because staff understood what constituted abuse and took action when people were at risk of abuse. There were appropriate numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs. People’s care needs were planned and reviewed regularly to meet their needs.

People were assessed before they started using the service to identify if their needs could be met by the provider. Staff had the knowledge and skills for caring and supporting people.

People told us the staff ensured that they had enough to eat and drink. There was a restaurant within the premises and staff supported people to go and have their meals there if they were not able to prepare their own meals.

People were involved in the care planning process and in decisions about their care and treatment. They told us, and we saw that staff were kind and treated them with dignity and respect.

Care was tailored to meet people’s individual needs. Care plans detailed how people wished to be supported. People were supported to engage in activities they enjoyed. They were supported to access the local community in order to minimise or prevent isolation. There were systems in place to support people if they wished to complain or raise concerns about the service.

People who used the service, their relatives and the staff were very complimentary about the registered manager of the service. We saw that the registered manager was accessible and people felt free to approach them if they had any concerns. People were encouraged and supported to provide feedback on the service. The provider had effective systems in place to review the quality of the service provided.

We identified that the provider was not meeting some of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 we inspect against and improvements were required. You can see what action we have told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.