About the service:

Coney Green is a residential care home offering personal and nursing care for up to nine people with learning disabilities and physical disabilities or long-term conditions. At the time of the inspection there were eight people living in the home.

People’s experience of using this service:

Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from abuse and discrimination. They knew to report any concerns and ensure action was taken. The registered manager worked with the local authority safeguarding adults team to protect people.

Staff were supported in their roles and received an effective level of training. They told us they were happy with the level of training and support they received and we observed them supporting people in a competent manner.

People continued to be supported by an established team of staff who provided kind and personalised care to people living in the home. Safe recruitment of staff ensured people were supported by staff of good character.

People were protected from harm by the provider having effective systems in place to monitor medicine management, staffing, and the safe upkeep of the premises. Systems were in place to ensure that people were protected by the prevention and control of infection. Accidents, incidents and any near misses were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence.

Staff promoted people's dignity and privacy. Staff provided person-centred support by listening to people and engaging them at every opportunity. Staff were caring and understanding towards people. People using the service appeared comfortable in the presence of staff working in the service.

Support plans were detailed and reviewed with the person and their relatives when possible. Staff worked with and took advice from health care professionals. People's health care needs were met.

Staff were supported and aware of their role responsibilities.

People had a variety of activities which they enjoyed on a regular basis.

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.

This care service supported people in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidelines. 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.

Effective leadership and systems helped oversee and continuously improve the quality of the service.

More information about the inspection is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection:

The home was rated Good at the last inspection (report published in April 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

We inspected this home on 16 February 2016. This was an unannounced Inspection. The home was registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to nine people who may have a learning disability or mental health support needs. At the time of our inspection nine people were living at the home.

The registered manager was present during 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.

People we spoke with told us they felt safe. Staff that we spoke with understood their responsibilities to protect people from harm and abuse. Risks had been assessed to keep people and staff safe. People and their relatives told us the management of medicines was consistent and safe.

Staff had access to a range of training to provide them with the level of skills and knowledge to deliver care efficiently to meet people’s individual needs. Staff were inducted and prepared for their roles.

Staff had a good understanding of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Systems were not always effective in demonstrating people’s level of mental capacity. Some necessary applications to apply for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to protect the rights of people had been submitted to the local supervisory body for authorisation.

People told us they could access food and drink independently. Information stored within one person's care plan contained conflicting guidance about the person’s nutritional needs. People we spoke with told us that they were involved in maintaining their health and well-being.

People were able to make decisions about how they wanted their care provided. Staff maintained people’s privacy and dignity whilst encouraging them to remain as independent as possible. People told us they were able to express their own views.

People told us that they were involved and contributed to the planning and reviewing of the support they needed. Activities were provided to meet the interests of individual people. We saw people were engaged in day to day living skills.

People and their relatives knew how to share their experiences and raise any complaints or concerns. The complaints procedure was available in different formats to meet the communication needs of people living at the home.

People and staff we spoke with were complimentary about their experience of the home and the quality of the leadership. People told us they were encouraged to express their views and experiences about living at the home.  Systems for monitoring the quality and safety of the service were being undertaken to drive improvements within the service.

On the day of our unannounced visit eight people were living at Coney Green Residential Care Home. We subsequently spoke to seven people who use the service, four of their relatives and three members of care staff.

From our observations it was apparent that care staff were attentive and friendly in the way they provided care and support. One visitor told us their relative was always clean, smelt fresh and looked nice. People told us they had opportunities to do interesting things each day, comments included; "I like to go shopping for food, the house and myself. I do all sorts."

People told us they felt happy and safe at Coney Green. We found evidence that the manager had taken reasonable steps to keep people safe from harm.

We found evidence that medicines were well managed and that people got the medicines they needed.One person told us;"Staff do it all for me.Two staff always check that it is right. They are red hot on medicines here."

People were complimentary about the care staff who supported them. Comments included,”I like all the staff" and "Yes, I know who my keyworker is, but I would speak to anyone of them if I had a problem."

We found there were effective systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service. People told us;"We talk about things in our meetings, health and safety,helping and activities." Some people told us the home needed new sofa's, we found this had been raised and the purchase of new ones agreed.

On the day of our unannounced visit nine people were living at Coney Green Residential Care Home. We subsequently spoke to six people who use the service, three of their relatives and three members of care staff.

We found the home to be clean, homely and comfortable and care was provided in an environment that was safe, accessible and adequately maintained.

People were complimentary about the care staff who supported them. Comments included,” I really like the staff, they are very kind to me.”

From our observations it was apparent that care staff were attentive, polite and sought consent before providing care and support. We examined care plans and found that people’s needs were properly assessed and that care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plans. We found that people who use services had given their consent to the care and support they received.

We interviewed care staff and checked personnel files and training records. We concluded that people who used the services were safe and their health and welfare needs were being met by staff who were fit, appropriately qualified and competent.

Examination of records revealed that Coney Green had a complaints policy and that concerns and complaints were recorded and investigated competently. People who used the services and those acting on their behalf could be confident that their comments and complaints would be listened to and dealt with effectively.

We spoke to three people that lived in the home. We also spoke to three relatives and observed the care people received.

People told us they were happy living in the home. They told us they were able to make decisions about what activities they took part in, the food they eat, when they get up and when they go to bed. People said they had meetings about making choices.

Some people said that they took part in running of the home. One person said they were involved in interviewing new care workers. Another took special interest in ensuring the kitchen was kept tidy.

We saw when people had concerns care workers listened to them. Care workers gave people a range of options and explained the consequences of each option.

Relatives we spoke to were very happy with the care at Coney Green Care Home. They said that the service was: " Wonderful" and "Marvellous." They told us that they were told of any health concerns for their relative.

A relative said: "Care workers and the other people living in the home had ensured that their relative had developed friendships."

Another said the registered manager: "Never made false promises."