1 Fengates is owned by Care Management Group Ltd. The home is a detached property providing accommodation for up to six people who have a learning disability. People's accommodation is arranged over two floors. All bedrooms are for single occupancy, with en-suite showers. At the time of our visit six people lived at the service.

At out last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good.

People were supported by sufficient, skilled staff to meet their needs and robust recruitment processes were in place to ensure only suitable staff were employed. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in safeguarding people from abuse.

Risks to people’s safety were identified and control measures implemented to keep people safe. People received their medicines safely and in line with prescription guidelines. Accidents and incidents were reviewed and action taken to prevent them happening again. The provider had developed a contingency plan to ensure that people’s care would continue in the event of an emergency.

Staff received on-going training and induction to support them in their roles. Staff received regular supervision and told us they felt supported by the registered manager

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 were supported to have nutritious food of their choosing. People’s care records were person centred and completed in detail. Care plans were regularly reviewed and updated to ensure staff had up to date guidance regarding people’s care. People had access to a range of individual activities in line with their interests.

People received support from staff who knew them well. Staff treated people with kindness and were aware of their preferences. People’s religious and cultural needs were respected and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s communication preferences. People were supported to remain healthy, and referrals were made to appropriate healthcare professionals should the need arise.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and ensure continuous development. There was a complaints policy in place and relatives told us they would feel comfortable in raising concerns. The service worked proactively with other agencies and shared best practice through their attendance at registered managers meetings.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

1 Fengates Road provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people who have a learning disability, such as Asperger's or epilepsy. People's accommodation is arranged over two floors. All bedrooms are for single occupancy, with en-suite showers. There were six people living at 1 Fengates Road on the day of our inspection.

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.

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

Staff met with their line manager on a one to one basis and staff said they felt supported and told us the provider had good management oversight of the home.

People lived in an homely environment which they were clearly proud of. Everyone was involved in maintaining the upkeep of the home by taking part in the cleaning and general housework duties.

People were extremely independent and encouraged and supported by staff to continue to be so. Staff supported people to keep healthy by encouraging people to eat a good range of nutritious foods. Everyone was involved in the menu planning, cooking 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. We heard people chose what they wished to do on the day, not only within the home but if they wished to go out.

People were not prevented from doing things they enjoyed as staff had identified and assessed individual risks for people. For example, those people who, at times, liked to eat less healthy food. The registered manager logged any accidents and incidents that occurred and staff responded to these by putting measures in please 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). No one was restricted in the home and were free to come and go as they pleased.

There were a sufficient number of staff on duty to enable people to either stay indoors or go out to their individual activities. People and staff interacted like good friends. It was evident staff knew people extremely well, understood people’s individuality and needs and respected people when they wished to have time alone. Staff were very caring to people and empathetic when it was needed.

Staff received a good range of training which included training specific to the needs of people living at 1 Fengates Road. This allowed them to carry out their role in an effective and competent way. Staff met together regularly as a team to discuss all aspect of the home.

Staff and the provider undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. Any areas identified as needing improvement were made or reported to the appropriate team.

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. We read people would be evacuated to another of the provider’s homes should the need arise.

Appropriate checks were carried out to help ensure only suitable staff worked in the home, such as a criminal record check. 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.

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

During our visit we met with five people who used the service and spoke with three of them about the service they received. We also spoke with the senior staff and two care staff.

Our observations of staff practice showed that people were receiving effective, safe and appropriate care, which was designed to meet their specific needs. We saw that people felt comfortable in approaching staff and asking for assistance. People were relaxed and content in their surroundings. Staff engaged positively with people using the service to encourage them to communicate their consent, wishes and choices.

Three people we spoke with told us that they were happy with the care and support they received. One person told us, “I feel like my home and I am happy living here.” Another person said, "I like it here and staff are nice."

People told us that staff treated them with respect and promoted their privacy. They told us they felt they would be listened to if they raised any concerns.

People told us that staff supported them to visit friends and families.

We spoke with two people, one came back from work and another person came back from the local supermarket both looked happy and was talking about their experiences.

Staff told us that they have received regular training and that they felt confident to carry out their roles and meet the needs of people using the service.

We found that the provider had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service they provided and we found that people were generally satisfied with the care and treatment they received.

We spoke with three of the five people who use the service. They told us that they were very happy with the care and support that they received. They told us that their care plans were discussed with them and they participated in care review meetings.

A person using the service said, I am very happy living here and it’s a very nice place to live’. Another person said, ‘the staff are caring and the care is brilliant, they can’t do enough for you’.

Two people we spoke with told us that they were fully involved in their care and treatment and they were able to make choices about all aspects of their daily living routines. We observed two people choosing their evening meal, which they prepared. Two people said they attended home meetings and their views were listened to and acted upon.

One person told us that they were a member of .the organisation’s (Care Management Group) service user parliament.