1-5 Yorkminster Drive is a residential care home for up to 12 people with learning disabilities and Autism. The home is set across three bungalows and each home is set as a separate home. At the time of our inspection there were nine people living at 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.

The inspection took place on the 09 November 2018 and was unannounced.

There was a registered manager at this home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered providers and registered managers 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.

The care service had not originally been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. However, people were given choices and their independence and participation within the local community encouraged.

People were relaxed and at ease around care staff they knew well. Relatives were happy about the care their family member received. Staff were caring and promoted people’s independence and people were able to maintain important relationships with family and friends. People had food and drink they enjoyed and had choices available to them, to maintain a healthy diet. Staff knew the people who lived at the home well and were able to support them to eat and drink. People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements to manage them. Relatives told us their family members had access to health professionals as soon as they were needed and were confident they received support to maintain their wellbeing.

Staff were extremely passionate about providing care that was based on people’s individual needs. People demonstrated to us that they valued their relationships with the staff and relatives praised staff for the support they provided. People were comfortable in the staff's presence. Conversations were warm and friendly and lots of reassurance and comfort provided. Relatives told us there were no restrictions on when they could visit and they were always made welcome by staff and enjoyed special occasions with their family members.

People were treated sensitively by staff that knew their needs well. People were involved in planning their care and staff used communication methods appropriate for each person

Relatives felt assured their family member was safe and receiving the correct support from a sufficient number of staff. Staff received training and understood the signs of abuse, and systems were in place to guide them in reporting these. Staff understood individual circumstances and how to protect people from harm. Staff underwent recruitment processes that included background checks on the suitability of staff to work at the home. People received their medicines and checks were undertaken to ensure people had received their medicines safely.

The registered manager promoted a culture where staff were encouraged to feel part of a team that were proud of their work with people at the service. Staff were encouraged to contribute ideas and suggestions for improving how they supported people. The provider and registered manager had effective systems to monitor how care at the service was provided, t

The inspection took place on 31 March 2016 and was unannounced.

Yorkminster Drive provides accommodation in three separate bungalows for up to 12 people with learning and physical disabilities. Ten people lived at the home at the time of our visit.

The home had a registered manager at the time of 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.

The home had a friendly and relaxed atmosphere and staff told us that they enjoyed working there. We saw staff were responsive to people's needs and had good knowledge of how people preferred their support to be provided.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe and well cared for at the home. There was enough trained staff to keep people safe. Staff had received training in safeguarding and understood their responsibility to report any observed or suspected abuse. Staff were knowledgeable about the risks associated with people’s care and support. Risk assessments and management plans were in place to manage the identified risks.

Medicines were managed safely so people received their medication as prescribed.

The registered manager understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure people were supported in a way that did not restrict their freedom.

Staff were kind and considerate to people. They respected and understood people's need for privacy and promoted their independence. People chose to pursue a variety of hobbies and interests at home and in their local community.

People chose what they wanted to eat and drink, and their nutritional needs were met. People were supported to maintain their health and well-being and staff knew when to refer to other health professionals.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint. A system was in place to manage complaints received about the service.

People were positive about the management team and how they managed the service. Staff were encouraged to continue to develop their skills in health and social care. They told us they felt supported by the managers’ to carry out their roles effectively.

People, their relatives and staff were asked their opinions about the home and there were processes to monitor the quality of care provided.

We visited all three bungalows and observed or spoke with people who lived in each one. We spoke with staff working in each bungalow, and two senior managers from CareTech who were visiting the service.

People we spoke with told us they liked living at Yorkminster Drive. One person said, “I’m happy here, we’re all happy here”. Another said, “We have lovely meals and we do the menu every Sunday”. Other people gave us ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers to questions. Their answers indicated they were happy living at Yorkminster Drive.

We saw that staff had a good understanding of the care needs of people living at Yorkminster Drive. Care records had improved but there were still inconsistencies in recording. We noted that senior managers in the organisation were monitoring and supporting the manager to improve this.

We looked at the cleanliness and infection control. All bungalows were clean and tidy, and there were systems in place to minimise the spread of infection.

We checked the safety, availability and suitability of equipment used at Yorkminster Drive. We were satisfied that there was sufficient equipment to meet the needs of people living at the home.

We spoke with five staff. They told us they had received training and were provided with management support to enable them to undertaken their work effectively.

We could not look at some records because the office was locked and the manager was not on duty.

We spoke with four people who live in one of the three bungalows at Yorkminster Drive. They told us they liked living at the home, and they liked the activities they take part in. We also observed the interactions between staff and people at Yorkminster Drive. We saw good relationships between staff and people who use the service. Staff treated people with dignity and respect.

We found where people were able to give consent to care and treatment they are supported to do so. When people lacked capacity to give consent, we saw that best interest meetings were held with those who knew and understand the person.

We saw food and drink provided to people supported their nutritional and hydration needs. Where able, people chose their menus on a weekly basis.

We found people were protected from abuse because staff understand the safeguarding policies and procedures. The organisation only recruits staff once it has received information to enable them to assess the safety and suitability of candidates.

We looked at the management of medicines, and found staff were trained to safely administer medicines, and they were given correctly and at the right time.

We looked at staff rotas, talked to staff and observed staff with people. We found there to be sufficient staffing to meet the assessed needs of the current number of people living at Yorkminster Drive.

We found that the people living at Yorkminster Drive were happy with their home. People told us if they were worried or unhappy they would speak to their key worker. During our conversations, some people told us their key workers name. Comments made included “I can tell ‘X’ (Name of care staff) anything, she always listens.” We saw good interaction between people who live in the home and the staff that helped them to meet their everyday needs.

The expert by experience who carried out the visit with us found out that many of the people living in the home had moved into the home together. The home they previously lived in closed. One person told her that this was nice because she already knew some of the people she would be living with.

Some people living in the home had limited communication problems due to their medical and physical health. The expert by experience said in her report, “I did not find it very easy to understand the verbal communication of all of the people in the bungalows. A lot of my findings are based on observations made in each bungalow.”

There was evidence in people’s care plans and items in people’s bedrooms that showed us that some family members are involved in supporting their relative in making decisions about their care. Care staff and people living in the home told us that some family members take part in events and activities planned by the home.

We found that the people living at Yorkminster Drive were happy with their home. People told us if they were worried or unhappy they would speak to their key worker. During our conversations, some people told us their key workers name. Comments made included “I can tell ‘X’ (Name of care staff) anything, she always listens.” We saw good interaction between people who live in the home and the staff that helped them to meet their everyday needs.

The expert by experience who carried out the visit with us found out that many of the people living in the home had moved into the home together. The home they previously lived in closed. One person told her that this was nice because she already knew some of the people she would be living with.

Some people living in the home had limited communication problems due to their medical and physical health. The expert by experience said in her report, “I did not find it very easy to understand the verbal communication of all of the people in the bungalows. A lot of my findings are based on observations made in each bungalow.”

There was evidence in people’s care plans and items in people’s bedrooms that showed us that some family members are involved in supporting their relative in making decisions about their care. Care staff and people living in the home told us that some family members take part in events and activities planned by the home.