Ashleigh House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and we looked at both during this inspection. Four people with a learning disability and physical disability were receiving residential care at Ashleigh House. They were between the ages of 33 and 53. Ashleigh House has been adapted to provide accommodation over two floors, with a vertical lift between floors.

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 the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection, we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good.

People were protected by the arrangements for their safety. This included recruitment, staffing, preventing infection, maintaining the premises, assessing, and managing risks. Staff knew how to protect people from abuse and discrimination.

Arrangements were in place should there be an emergency which required evacuation of the premises. The positioning of a ‘grab bag’, kept in a first floor office, appeared unwise, to both the inspector and the registered manager. We recommend that the provider reviews the arrangements for an emergency situation.

Arrangements for managing medicines on people’s behalf included clear, detailed records, protocols, and safe administration. The current storage arrangements for medicines, which required specialist storage, did not meet current legislation. However, the provider had identified this and was making the required changes.

Staff were skilled, confident and effective in the care and support they provided. A health care professional said, “I can’t really fault them.”

People’s legal rights were understood and upheld with as little restriction as possible.

Dietary challenges were being met so that people received sufficient, nutritious food and fluids to their liking, and in a safe way.

People’s health care needs were understood and met. Staff had recognised, and responded quickly, when a person was ill and needed medical attention. Routine health care needs were met through regular contact with external health care professionals.

People received a caring service, which recognised their need for privacy and respect. All engagements between staff and people using the service were friendly, relaxed and made people feel valued and cared for. People’s family members said (their family member) was happy at Ashleigh House and staff were friendly.

People were supported to live active and full lives according to their preference and ability. The premises were adapted so that people had equal access to shared areas and there were plans for further improvement. People’s rooms were individual to them. One family member said, “The room is lovely."

Support plans were detailed and reviewed regularly. People’s needs were understood through effective communication, in which staff were skilled.

Staff were supervised and supported. Audits and checks were carried out in-house and through the provider, so any problem could be identified and rectified.

The registered manager understood and met their legal responsibilities.

This inspection took place on 17 December 2015 and was an unannounced inspection.

Ashleigh House specialises in providing care and support to adults who have a learning disability, autism and/or a physical disability. Accommodation is arranged over two levels with stairs and a small lift providing access to the first floor. The home can accommodate up to eight people. All bedrooms are for single occupancy and the home is staffed 24 hours a day.

At the time of our inspection there were six people living at the home. The people we met with had complex physical and learning disabilities and were not able to tell us about their experiences of life at the home. We therefore used our observations of care and our discussions with staff to help form our judgements.

The manager had submitted an application to be the 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.

People were supported by a caring staff team who knew them well. Staff morale was good and there was a happy and relaxed atmosphere in the home.

Routines in the home were flexible and were based around the needs and preferences of the people who lived there. People were able to plan their day with staff and they were supported to access social and leisure activities in the home and local community.

The home was a safe place for people. Staffing levels were good and staff understood people’s needs and provided the care and support they needed.

Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. They had received training in safeguarding adults from abuse and they knew the procedures to follow if they had concerns.

People’s health care needs were monitored and met. People received good support from health and social care professionals. Staff were skilled at communicating with people, especially if people were unable to communicate verbally.

People contributed to the assessment and planning of their care as far as they were able. Care plans showed that people’s relatives attended “Person Centred Reviews” where they could discuss the care and support their relative received.

People were unable to look after their own medicines. Staff made sure medicines were stored securely and there were sufficient supplies of medicines. People received their medicines when they needed them.

People were always asked for their consent before staff assisted them with any tasks and staff knew the procedures to follow to make sure people’s legal and human rights were protected.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.