The service provides care and support to people with learning disabilities and/or autistic spectrum conditions. Seven people were being supported by the service at the time of the inspection.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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.

People experienced good care and support. They were supported to live safe, fulfilled and meaningful lives in the way they wanted to.

People were supported with healthy eating and to maintain a healthy weight, with specialist diets when required. People who needed assistance with meal preparation were supported and encouraged to make choices about what they ate and drank.

The support staff demonstrated a sound knowledge of people’s care needs, significant people and events in their lives, and their daily routines and preferences. They also understood the provider’s safeguarding procedures and could explain how they would protect people if they had any concerns. The service was safe and there were appropriate safeguards in place to help protect the people who lived there

Staff told us they really enjoyed working in the home and spoke positively about the culture and management of the service . Staff said they enjoyed their jobs and described management as supportive. Staff confirmed they could raise issues and make suggestions about the way the service was provided.

People could make choices about the way in which they were cared for. Staff listened to them and knew their needs well. Staff had the supervision, training and support they needed.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practices were safe and relevant checks had been completed before staff worked at the home. People’s medicines were managed appropriately so they received them safely.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People using the service 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.

The service ensured people were treated with kindness, respect and compassion. People also received emotional support when needed. People told us they were involved in planning the care and support they received and could maintain their independence as much as possible. Information was provided to people in formats they could understand.

This inspection took place on 10 and 11 August 2016 and was unannounced. We last inspected this service in January 2014 and found that they were meeting the legal requirements in the areas we looked at.

Dugdale House is a residential care home that provides accommodation and support for up to eight people with learning disabilities and autism spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were eight people living at the home.

The home had 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was approachable and supportive of staff and people who lived at the service.

The provider had effective systems to protect people from avoidable harm. Appropriate risk assessments had been carried out and risk management plans put in place for each person who lived at the home, and for the environment to ensure people’s safety. There was a sufficient number of staff who were trained and knew how to meet people’s care needs. People’s medicines were administered safely and they were supported to access healthcare services to maintain their health and well-being.

People had enough to eat and drink. They were provided with a choice of food, snacks and drinks as appropriate. They were supported to access healthcare services when required. Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and sought people’s consent before providing care and support. They were trained in areas that were relevant to the needs of the people, who lived at the home. They were knowledgeable about people’s care needs and they provided appropriate support to people.

People were treated with dignity and respect and were encouraged to maintain their independence, interests and hobbies. They were supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decision about their care. Staff were respectful and friendly in their interactions with people.

People’s needs had been identified before they moved to the home, and changes to people’s needs were managed appropriately. People had personalised care plans that gave guidance to staff on meeting people’s needs. They were supported by the staff team to take part in activities that were of interest to them.

The provider had an effective system in place for handling complaints. They encouraged feedback from people and acted on this to improve the quality of the service. They also had an effective quality monitoring process in place to ensure they were meeting the required standards of care.

During our inspection on 16 January 2014, we spoke with the manager, three staff and two people who used the service. As some people who lived at Dugdale House had limited verbal communication and could not talk with us, we used methods of observation to help us to understand their experience of living there.

During our visit we noted that people were relaxed and calm. We observed that staff supported people in a way that respected their dignity and promoted their independence.

The quality of staff interactions with people were positive and staff we spoke with showed a good understanding of how people communicated and involved people in their care as much as possible.

People living at the home were not able to communicate their thoughts and feelings to us about the specific areas we were looking at during this visit. However we met six out of the eight people who lived at Dugdale House and spent time with them. We observed that there was a calm, relaxed atmosphere and people had things to do and received support and attention from staff when they needed it. People knew the names of the staff who were providing support and interacted positively with them. All areas of the service we visited were fresh and clean.

We found that action had been taken by the provider to ensure staff had access to the information they would need to report an adult protection issue should the need arise.

We found that the provider had taken steps to improve the quality monitoring processes in place but these actions had not been fully completed at the time of our visit. These actions included seeking the views of people’s representatives and the community health and social care professionals who visit the service.

It was disappointing to note that the timescales in the action plan that had been sent to us by the provider following our last visit, had not been fully implemented. We will be following this up with the provider to ensure this had been completed.

The service does not currently have a registered manager.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. This was because some people had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us about their experiences. We observed the interaction between people using the service and the staff present during our visit and reviewed care records.

People told us about how they spent their time. We heard that they went swimming and liked the day centres they attended. One person said they liked going to the pub and attended a gardening project and horse riding sessions. Some people spent time with their friends and family who visited or took them out for the day. The people who were able to communicate verbally confirmed that they felt safe. Two people were able to show us their rooms and indicated they liked the way they were arranged with their own personal possessions.

During our visit we observed that the people who live at Dugdale House knew the staff by their name. We observed that people looked to staff for support during the day as their needs changed. We noted that people showed positive signs of warmth and good humour towards the staff who were present.

Most of the people who live at Dugdale House have limited verbal communication. During our visit to the home we had a conversation with one person, but they did not talk to us directly about their experience of the service.

We observed a good relationship between the staff and the people in the home. People appeared to be relaxed and happy, and to be involved in daily activities of their choice.