Blossom View Respite Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 10 people with physical and learning disabilities. The services original purpose was to provide temporary respite support. The service has developed to also support some people on a permanent basis.

The home is located in North Sheffield close to local shops and transport links and is part of a wider complex which incorporates a café, education, businesses, leisure facilities; day services a hydro pool and rebound (trampoline).

There was a registered manager employed at the service. 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.

This was the service’s first inspection since their registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in December 2016.

We carried out this inspection on 17 October 2017. The inspection was unannounced. This meant no-one at the service knew we were planning to visit. On the day of inspection there were two people living at Blossom View. The deputy manager told us the service currently had 17 people registered for respite care and support; no people were receiving respite support on the day of our inspection.

The registered manager was on annual leave the day of our inspection. The deputy manager capably assisted with the inspection.

People were able to express their happiness and satisfaction with the care they received by facial expression (smiles), body languages and gestures.

People’s relatives spoke positively about the standard of care and support their family member received.

Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures and knew what to do if an allegation was made or they suspected abuse.

We found systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines safely.

Staff recruitment procedures ensured people’s safety was promoted.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs safely and effectively.

The service followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) Code of practice and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The registered provider’s policies and systems supported this practice.

People enjoyed the food provided and were supported to receive adequate food and drink to remain healthy.

We found the home was clean, bright and well maintained. The bedrooms of people who were living at the home on a permanent basis had been personalised and communal areas were comfortably furnished.

People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was protected. Relatives we spoke with made positive comments about the care provided by staff.

Staff were receiving regular training and supervision so they were skilled and competent to carry out their role.

We found people’s support plans and risk assessments were reviewed regularly and in response to any change in needs.

Staff knew the people they were supporting and provided a personalised service. Support plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported. People receiving support, or their relative were involved in making decisions about their care.

We saw people participated in a range of daily activities both in and outside of the home which were meaningful and promoted independence.

There was a comprehensive complaints policy and procedure. This was clearly displayed in the home and in the statement of purpose. Relatives said they could speak with staff if they had any worries or concerns and they would be listened to and action would be taken to address any concerns they had voiced.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality o