Briar House is a small care home that provides care and support for up to 6 people who have a learning disability, such as autism or epilepsy. The home is owned and operated by Cavendish Care who operates several homes in the Surrey area. On the day of our inspection 6 people were living in the home.

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 registered manager was present for the duration of the inspection.

Medicines were managed in a safe way and recording of medicines was completed to show people had received the medicines they required.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet people’s needs and support their activities. People and staff interaction was relaxed. It was evident staff knew people well and understood people’s needs and aspirations. Staff were very caring to people and respected their privacy and dignity.

Staff received a good range of training specific to people’s needs. This allowed them to carry out their role in an effective and competent way. Staff met with their line manager on a one to one basis to discuss their work. Staff said they felt supported and told us the registered manager had good management oversight of the home.

Appropriate checks, such as a disclosure and barring record (DBS) check were carried out to help ensure only suitable staff worked in the home. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse and were able to tell us what they would do in such an event and they had access to a whistleblowing policy should they need to use it.

People lived in a homely environment and were encouraged to be independent by staff. Staff supported people to keep healthy by providing people with a range of nutritious foods. Staff encouraged people as much as possible to be involved in the menu planning and shopping.

People had access to external health services and professional involvement was sought by staff when appropriate to help maintain good health.

People were encouraged to take part in a range of activities which were individualised and meaningful for people. Daily routines were flexible depending on how people felt or other activities available.

People had risk assessments in place for identified risks. The registered manager logged any accidents and incidents that occurred and put measures in place for staff to follow to mitigate any further accidents or incidents.

Staff had followed legal requirements to make sure that any decisions made or restrictions to people were done in the person’s best interests. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The registered manager and staff undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. Any areas identified as needing improvement were actioned by staff.

If an emergency occurred or the home had to close for a period of time, people’s care would not be interrupted as there were procedures in place to manage this.

A complaints procedure was available for any concerns. This was displayed in a format that was easy for people to understand. People and their relatives were encouraged to feedback their views and ideas into the running of the home.

We carried out an inspection to this service in January 2014. During this inspection we found the provider had not met the regulations which related to supporting workers.The provider submitted an action plan saying they would meet the standards of the regulation by the end of March 2014.

We carried out this inspection to check whether or not the provider had taken appropriate action in relation to this area and to ensure the staff employed by the service had received appropriate training to enable them to deliver care to people safely and to an appropriate standard.

At the time of our inspection there were six people living in the home and 11 staff employed by the service. As part of our inspection we spoke with the Registered Manager and three staff members. Some of the people who lived at Briar House had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences of using the service; we therefore used our observations and spoke with people's relatives to help inform some of our judgements.

We saw that people were supported by staff in a caring and sensitive way. One person indicated to us that they were happy living in the home. We saw that staff promoted people's independence, for example, people were supported to attend activities they enjoyed such as hydro pool sessions.

We spoke with some relatives of people who used the service over the telephone. They all told us they felt their relative was supported well by staff in the home. One relative said "I couldn't ask for better, they are wonderful". Relatives of people spoke highly of staff and described them as "Caring" and "Professional". They told us that they would feel confident to raise a complaint should they need to do so.

We found that the service had completed the relevant recruitment checks on staff before they had started to work in the home. Staff told us they felt "Supported" in their role. However, we found concerns that many staff had not received up to date training which could affect the care and support that people received.

At the time of our visit there were six people living at Briar House. Most of the people who lived in the home had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences of using the service; we therefore used our observations and spoke with relatives of people to help inform our judgements. We saw that people were being supported around the home by staff in a kind and sensitive manner and in a way that promoted individual independence.

Relatives of people who used the service told us that they were involved in the decisions regarding their relative's care and were happy with the care and support provided. Comments included "My relative is very well cared for", "We have regular reviews regarding the care and support" and "The staff communicate well with us and my relative".

Relatives spoke highly of the staff and described them as "Wonderful" and "Very good". They told us that staff were recruited effectively, were well trained and they felt confident that their relatives were "Safe" in the home.

Staff told us they "Enjoyed" working at the home and felt supported by their manager.

We found that appropriate checks were in place to confirm the suitability of staff to work with vulnerable people.

People who use services at Briar House have multiple or complex needs. It was not possible to speak with them directly about their levels of satisfaction with the outcome areas inspected. We observed that people using services, who are predominantly younger adults, appeared relaxed and at ease in their surroundings. They were encouraged to express their views and make or participate in making decisions relating to their care and treatment. Records also showed people living in the home to be busy on a daily basis, taking part in a range of planned and meaningful activities in line with their plan of care.