Bradbury Lodge is an assessment and transition service for up to a maximum of six adults with learning disabilities and complex behaviour. The home is situated next door to the local cottage hospital and in walking distance of local amenities. Bradbury Lodge meets the values expressed in Registering the Right Support (CQC policy). At the time of inspection there were three people using the service.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People were protected from abuse by staff that understood how to recognise and respond to concerns. People had risk assessments in place regarding their own safety and assessments were made of the environment. People were supported by sufficient staff. People received their medicine on time by staff deemed competent to administer. People lived in a clean home and improvements to the building were being made. Accidents and incidents were reviewed by both the manager and the provider's positive behaviour team.

Peoples care needs were assessed and reviewed. Staff received training relevant to their role and received additional training as and when someone presented with additional needs. People stated that they liked the food and the home supported a healthy diet. Staff reported they worked well together. People had access to health professionals. The building is currently being adapted due to the needs of the current group.

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 support this practice.

People were treated with kindness. People were asked their views on the service. People’s privacy was respected

People received care that was personalised. People had access to a complaints procedure and staff understood the complaints process. The service does not deliver end of life care

The provider has a clear vision for the service. People's care was audited alongside other aspects in the home, People had access to advocacy services. The provider reviewed its systems and processes and worked with other agencies, adopting local best practice when relevant.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

When we visited Bradbury Lodge we met the five people who lived there.The people were able to talk to us and they told us that they liked the home. They told us about the activities they liked. One person told us they thought the home “needed painting”. They said they liked gardening and to go out to clubs. One person told us “whatever I want to do someone will take me”. They told us they liked the cycle track and that they were going out to buy a new cycle helmet. We were invited into two people’s bedrooms. The rooms were well furnished to meet the people’s needs. We saw there were televisions, games consoles and music centres in the bedrooms. One person was with a member of staff watching music videos in an activity room. They showed us how they used the computer and talked about the singers they liked. One person showed us their care plans which they were looking though. All the people were relaxed and busy going out shopping, helping in the office and doing a jigsaw.

We observed the staff on duty interacting with the people. The staff showed that they understood people’s needs and supported them in a person centred way. The people were making friendly jokes with the staff. Everyone seemed to have a good relationship and was comfortable in each other’s company.

We were shown around the building. All areas were clean and tidy. The rooms were furnished to meet people’s needs. The building was light and people had space to move around. There were several lounge and activity areas. The kitchen and bathroom areas were all clean and well maintained. We were shown that the medication, monies and files were kept in a locked room.

We spoke to two members of staff on duty. They told us that they worked as a team and helped each other. They demonstrated to us that they knew the people very well. They were able to tell us how they supported the people to have active and full lives. They said that if people wanted to go out “this was easy to accommodate”. They told us they felt very well supported by the management and their colleagues. They said the manager was always there or could be reached on the telephone. They said they had good training which gave them the skills to do their work. They told us how they had been helped to achieve their qualifications. They said they were able to talk to their manager and report any concerns and these would be addressed. They told us that they had supervision every three months and an annual personal development plan.

We met and spoke with three of the four people who were living at Bradbury Lodge. People shared their experiences about using the service and how they were supported in their daily lives. People told us they liked the home, the staff and their activities. We saw people were treated with respect and had their privacy and dignity upheld.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the needs of the people they supported. They shared excellent examples of how they offered people choices, respected their privacy and dignity and promoted their independence. They knew people's preferences, communication methods, likes and dislikes well. People told us they were supported to attend health appointments to maintain their health and welfare.

People told us the staff were, “Nice”. Staff were confident to recognise and report abuse. They had received training on protecting vulnerable adults and were confident to speak out if they observed poor or abusive practice.

Staff told us they were very well supported. They said they were provided with, “Very good” training opportunities to keep people safe and meet their individual needs. This enabled them to offer effective care and support to the people who used the service.

People said if they were not happy they would speak with the staff. We saw complaints received had been appropriately actioned and investigated. Staff told us they were confident in raising concerns on behalf of the people they supported.

This inspection took place on 23 and 24 July 2015 and was unannounced.

Bradbury Lodge provides accommodation and personal care for adults who have a learning disability for a maximum of six people. On the days of our inspection four people were living in the home.

The home had a registered manager in post who was present for our inspection. 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.

At our previous inspection no improvements were identified as needed.

People told us that they felt safe living in the home and staff knew how to keep them safe. Arrangements were in place to ensure that people were actively involved in managing risk with activities they did within and outside the home. Staff told us they had access to risk assessments that told them how to support people safely. Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed and where necessary action was taken to reduce further risk.

People told us that staff were always nearby to support them when needed and staff confirmed there were enough staff on duty to meet people’s care needs. The provider’s recruitment procedure ensured that all staff were suitable to work in the home.

We found that people were supported to take their prescribed medicines and saw that systems and practices ensured they received their medicines when needed. We saw that medicines were recorded and stored in accordance to good practice guidance.

Staff told us that they had access to training that ensured they had the skills to care for people. Staff were supported within their role and received regular support and supervision from the manager. People told us that staff asked for their consent before providing support and that staff listened to them. We found that staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and people told us that staff did support them to make a decision. The manager and the staff team were aware of the principles of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and when this should be applied to protect people’s human rights.

People told us that they had a choice of meals and we saw that people had access to drinks at all times. People said they were able to obtain healthcare services when needed.

People informed us that staff were kind and we saw that staff were supportive to people’s needs. People were involved in making decisions about their care and said they were happy with the support they received. We saw that people’s right to privacy was respected and staff were able to tell us how they maintained people’s privacy and dignity.

We saw that people were supported to engage in social activities of their choice and staff assisted them to maintain contact with people important to them. The provider’s complaint procedure was accessible in various formats so everyone could understand it and people told us that staff did listen to their concerns.

The provider encouraged people to be involved in the day to day running of the home and supported them to maintain links with their local community. Regular meetings and reviews of the service ensured people received a service that met their specific needs. People and staff were aware of who the manager was and said they felt supported. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality and effectiveness of the service provided to people.