About the service:

• The service is in a residential area of Leicester.

• The service provides accommodation and personal care to people with learning disabilities and autism. The care home can accommodate 14 people in one building. At the time of our inspection there were 11 people using the service.

People's experience of using this service:

• The service was safe. There was an issue with infection control. This was followed up by the registered manager.

• There was not a fully homely atmosphere for people as parts of the premises were cold.

• Questionnaires had been supplied to people and their representatives for their views of the service. These were generally positive about people’s satisfaction with the service. However, action plans were not in place to show how any issues raised had been dealt with.

• Audit processes were in place but they had not comprehensively ensured quality care as they had not identified issues of concern.

• People and relatives told us that people liked living at the service.

• People were protected against abuse, neglect and discrimination. Staff members were aware of ensuring people's individual safety risks and acting to prevent harm coming to them.

• Staff members knew people well and people appeared to enjoy the attention from staff.

• People were assisted to have choice and control of their lives.

• People and their representatives had a say in how the service was operated and managed.

• People's care was personalised to meet their individual needs.

• A registered manager was in place to ensure governance of the service.

• The service met the characteristics for a rating of "good" in caring and responsive but not safe, effective and well led where the rating was Requires Improvement.

• More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection:

• At our last inspection, the service was rated "good". Our last report was published for the inspection of 3 August 2016.

Why we inspected:

• This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received.

Follow up:

• We will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people received safe, high quality care. Further inspections will be planned for future dates.

This inspection took place on 3 August 2016 and was unannounced.

Cherre Residential Care is a care home for people with learning disabilities, autism spectrum disorder and mental health needs. A maximum of 14 people can use the service. At the time of our visit, nine people lived in the home.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Staff and people understood safeguarding policies and procedures. Staff followed people’s individual risk assessments to ensure they minimised any identified risks to people’s health and social care. Checks were carried out prior to staff starting work at the service to reduce the risk of employing unsuitable staff. People who lived at the home had complex needs. There were good levels of staff on duty to keep people safe, and they had received training to help them meet people’s needs effectively.

The provider understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards and the service complied with these requirements. Medicines were administered safely to people, and people had good access to health care professionals when required.

People enjoyed activities within the home, and were supported to take part in hobbies or activities that interested them such as going out to the pub, shopping, swimming and going for walks.

People received care and support which was tailored to their individual needs. They enjoyed the food provided, and helped with meal planning, preparation and cooking.

Staff were motivated to work with people who lived at Cherre Residential Care. People and staff enjoyed good relationships with each other which were supportive, friendly, and caring.

The registered manager was open and accessible to both people and staff. There were sufficient informal and formal monitoring systems in place to ensure quality of service was maintained. People and their relatives knew how to complain and both formal and informal complaints were investigated fully.

We carried out this inspection to check whether the provider had made the required improvements following our inspection in May 2013. In order to do this we visited the home and spoke with three members of staff, including the registered manager. We also spoke with two people who used the service.

People who used the service told us that they were happy living at the home. We asked them if they were able to spend their time as they wished to. One of the people we spoke with said that they did get to spend their time as they wanted to and that they regularly went out into the local community. We observed people undertaking various activities at the time of our visit and were told that many people were out of the home as they were at day centres. We found that people were spending their time accessing the local community and taking part in activities they enjoyed.

Staff we spoke with described a number of improvements which had taken place at the home. One staff member said: "There have been some improvements. They've got more involved in choosing their activities."

We found that significant improvements had been made to the premises since our last visit. The home appeared to be cleaner and was being well maintained. We saw that a plan of re-decoration was in progress.

We found that the service was recording complaints and incidents and that any allegations of abuse had been appropriately reported to the relevant agencies.

At the time of our visit there were 12 people using the service. As part of our inspection we spoke with five people who used the service. We also spoke with three professionals involved in people's care, including two social workers and a member of the deprivation of liberty safeguarding team. We talked to eight members of staff, including the manager and the provider, and the relative of someone who used the service.

People using the service told us that they were happy at the home. One person told us that they "had set times when they went out." Another person told us that they liked their room and that they were happy living there. They said: "I love my bedroom. I have my own stereo and TV. It's a lovely home." One of the people we spoke with told us that they did not get along with some of the other people living at the home.

Most of the staff working at the home described a supportive management structure and told us that they worked together well as a team. One member of staff told us that they were not comfortable approaching the management and that, at times, they felt there was a negative atmosphere at the home.

We found the home to be in a poor state of repair at the time of our visit. The home was in need of redecoration and there was disused furniture being stored in the back garden which was regularly accessed by people using the service. We found that people's needs were not always being met in terms of them being able to access the local community.

At the time of our visit there were 12 people living at the home. As part of our inspection we spoke to three people using the service, five members of staff working at the service, and the relatives of three people living at the home.

One of the people using the service said they liked the staff who worked there. They told us “The staff are good to me. They treat me well.” Another person told us, “My room is a massive room. I don’t want to share. I like it.” This person described being able to carry out the activities they wanted to and having choices about what they did at the home.

All of the people using the service told us that they were able to get involved in things which interested them. One person commented, “I can do the things I like to do. Cooking – I cook my own food. Draw pictures.”

The staff we spoke to at the home all enjoyed working there and described a very positive environment for people using the service. One staff member told us, “We listen to service user’s rights. We respect their choices and treat them with dignity.” Another staff member told us they felt supported by the management at the home, they commented, “Whenever I’ve had any problems I can go straight to management.”

We spoke to the relatives of three people using the service as part of our inspection. The relatives we spoke were happy about the standard of care at the home. One relative described the staff as, “Very, very good at understanding his needs. They know my son inside out.” Another relative commented that, “He seems fine. We do see a lot of different staff when we go but on the whole they seem OK.”

People told us that care staff involved them in their care, treatment and support programme and were always involved in their planned care delivery. People told us that they received input and treatment from other health care professionals such as general practitioners, opticians, chiropodists and specialist nurses.

People told us that they were encouraged to undertake a wide range of social activities within the home and within the community.

People told us that they felt safe in the home. They said that they felt that the staffing levels were sufficient and the staff had the right qualifications, skills and knowledge to perform their duties.

People told us that they were provided with the opportunity to comment on the quality of service provision at residents meetings and were also able to discuss any issues which were important to them.