CMG 5 Fengates Road is owned by Care Management Group Ltd. The home is a detached property providing accommodation for up to five people who have learning disability. The home is located in Redhill, Surrey. The home is accessible to local shops and public transport. Redhill town centre is also close by. People's accommodation is arranged over two floors. All bedrooms are for single occupancy, with en-suite showers. At the time of our visit five 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.

Hazards to people’s safety were identified and action was taken to help them manage the risks of harm to keep themselves safe. People received their medicines safely and in line with prescription guidelines. Accidents and incidents were reviewed with people and action taken to minimise the risk of them happening again. There was a plan in place to ensure that people’s care would continue in the event of an emergency.

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.

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 support them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff had a clear understanding of supporting people’s independence.

People had enough to eat and drink and were involved in meal choice, planning and preparation.

People were supported to remain healthy, and referrals were made to appropriate healthcare professionals should the need arise.

The home was clean, and reflected the needs and preferences of the people who lived here.

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.

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.

5 Fengates Road provides accommodation and personal care for up to five 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 five people living at the home 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 safely stored and medication administration records were complete. Although people held their medicines in their rooms, staff had oversight of medicines administration to ensure people received the medicines they required, when they required them.

People lived in an environment which felt like a home. There were personalised items throughout and people were seen to answer the telephone and the front door. Everyone took part in the cleaning and general housework duties around the home and they were all involved in shopping for the food for meals.

People decided on the food that was to be cooked each day and staff ensured they were provided with a range of health nutritious foods, fruit and vegetables they could help themselves to. External healthcare professionals were accessed when appropriate to help ensure people remained healthy and well.

People’s independence was encouraged by staff and we heard people choose what they wished to do. We saw people go out and return from activities having had a good time. There was a range of activities available for people. These were individualised and meaningful.

Staff had identified and assessed individual risks for people. This meant they could continue to lead their lives but in a safe way. Accidents and incidents were recorded by staff and we read when these happened staff put measures in place to prevent reoccurrence.

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.

We found a sufficient number of staff to meet the needs of people. Staff were always on hand to support people when they needed it, but people were also enabled to act independently when they wanted to. Staff clearly knew people well and understood their individual characteristics. We heard staff speak to people in a respectful, kind and caring way and the interactions between staff and people were positive.

Staff were supported to carry out their role in an effective and competent way because they were provided with a range of training by the provider. This included training specific to people’s needs, for example, autism.

Annual appraisals and one to one meetings took place between staff and their line manager to allow staff to discuss any aspect of their work. Staff told us the provider had good management oversight of the home and responded to any concerns the may have.

Quality assurance audits took place to ensure the care of the service was of a standard people should expect. Some people living at 5 Fengates Road were involved in these audits. Action was taken on any areas identified as needing improvement. Relatives and external stakeholders had the opportunity to feed back to the provider on their views of the quality of the service provided.

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.

During our visit we met with three people who used the service and spoke with them about the service they received. We also spoke with the registered manager, two care staff and a relative.

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 who used 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 like it her because it is closer to my family.” Another person said, "I like it here and staff are polite and 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.

Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately

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

We saw two people who were getting ready to attend a sport day and were looking forward to this event. Another person was waiting to go out with family for lunch.

One relative we spoke with told us “The service is good and we are very pleased. When I drop my relative I know she is safe and staff know her very well.”

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 talked to two staff, all of whom showed a good understanding and knowledge of people at the home. We observed staff interacting with people and saw that they were respectful and offered them choices. We spoke to three people, who gave us examples of choices they had made, such as activities.

We observed staff assisting people in making choices and in offering choices, such as a choice of food. We read in people’s records how their wishes, likes and dislikes were taken into account in their care and support plans. We saw detailed care plans and risk assessments and saw that people were supported to be involved in their care planning and in expressing their wishes.

We read recent responses to surveys of people, families and carers, outside professionals and staff. The responses were positive about the service.

We read in people’s notes the process for making major decisions and a person did not have capacity to make them. This process involved outside agencies. We saw minutes of meetings about decision making. This made sure that people’s best interests were protected.

We looked quality assurance and governance systems and found that there were suitable processes in place to monitor and improve the service.

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 showed people living in the home were busy on a daily basis, taking part in a range of planned and meaningful activities, in line with their individual plan of care. People using the service told us that they were happy with their accommodation and liked the staff that supported them. Some people told us about their interests and how they were supported to keep in regular contact with their family members and friends, which made them happy.