This inspection took place on 4 October 2017 and was unannounced. This means prior to the inspection people were not aware we were inspecting the service on that day.

Greenside Court is a care home with nursing which can accommodate 20 people with physical disabilities, or mental disabilities associated with Huntington's Disease. People with Huntington's Disease are cared for in a specially designed 10 bedded unit. The home was purpose built in 2003, and is situated in Greasbrough, a residential area of Rotherham, and is near to local shops and facilities. At the time of the inspection there were 18 people living at the home.

There was no registered manager in place for the service. The home had a manager who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC 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.

Our last inspection at Greenside Court took place on 28 May and 3 June 2015. The home was rated as Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People who used the service told us they felt safe living in the home. Their relatives spoke positively about the standard of care and support their family member received. Healthcare professionals told us they had no concerns about this service and that they enjoyed visiting the home and working with the staff team.

People received their medicines at the right time and in the right way to meet their needs. Healthcare professionals, such as chiropodists, opticians, GPs and dentists were involved in people's care when necessary.

Staff employed at the home had been recruited in a way that helped to keep people safe because thorough checks were completed prior to them being offered a post.

People received care that was delivered in line with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) because people were supported to make day to day choices and decisions about their lives. Appropriate and timely applications to ensure that restrictions on people's liberty to leave the home had been made for everyone that needed them.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs and to enable them to engage with people in a relaxed and unhurried manner. People were supported by staff who had received an induction into the service and appropriate training, professional development and supervision to enable them to meet people's individual needs.

People said they enjoyed the meals provided to them and that there was plenty of choice. People could choose to eat their meals either in the dining room or their own room.

Staff knew the people they were supporting and provided a personalised service. Support plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and people were involved in making decisions about their care.

We observed staff displayed caring and meaningful interactions with people and treating people with respect. We observed people's dignity and privacy were actively promoted by the staff supporting them in a situation where some people could not speak up for themselves.

A varied range of activities were made available and we saw staff were proactive in engaging people with individual activities of their preferred choice.

There were opportunities for people who used the service, their families, staff and healthcare professionals to become involved in developing the service and they were encouraged to provide feedback about the service provided. This was both on an informal basis speaking to the managers’ and through a quality assurance survey.

Everyone we consulted felt the home was well-led and were positive about the managers’. People were aware of the registered provider's vision and values, how they related to their work and spoke positively about the culture and management of t

The inspection took place on 26 May 2015 and was unannounced. Our last scheduled inspection at this service took place in January 2014 when no breaches of legal requirements were identified.

Greenside Court is a care home with nursing. It can accommodate up to 20 people with physical disabilities and/ or mental needs associated with Huntington’s Disease. People living with Huntington’s Disease are carerd for in a specially designed 10 bedded unit. The home was purpose built in 2003 and is situated in Greasbrough, a residential area of Rotherham. The home is near local shops and facilities.

The service had a registered manager in post 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.

We spoke with staff who had a clear understanding of safeguarding adults and what action they would take if they suspected abuse. Staff we spoke with were confident the manager would act appropriately to safeguard people from abuse.

Care and support was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people were safe. The support plans we looked at included risk assessments which identified any risk associated with

people’s care. We saw risk assessments had been devised to help minimise and monitor the risk.

We spoke with staff and people who used the service and found there were enough staff with the right skills, knowledge and experience to meet people’s needs.

People were supported to have their assessed needs, preferences and choices met by staff who had the necessary skills and knowledge.

We found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The staff we spoke with had some knowledge of this and said they would speak to the registered manager for further advice.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient to maintain a balanced diet. Meals were appropriately spaced throughout the day with snacks in-between. Meals were flexible to meet the needs of the people who used the service.

People were supported to maintain good health, have access to healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support. We looked at people’s records and found they had received support from healthcare professionals when required.

People who used the service were supported to maintain friendships. Support plans contained information about their family and friends and those who were important to them. We saw that people had their own interests and hobbies and took part in several activities and events on a weekly basis.

We saw staff were aware of people’s needs and the best ways to support them, whilst maintaining their independence.

People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual support plan. The support plans were person centred and some contained pictures to assist the person to understand their plan. Support plans included information about healthcare, communication, personal hygiene, mobility and activities.

The service had a complaints procedure and people knew how to raise concerns.

Staff we spoke with felt the service was well led and the registered manager was approachable and listened to them. Staff confirmed they knew their role within the organisation and the role of others. They knew what was expected of them and took accountability at their level.

We observed interactions between people and staff which was positive and inclusive. People told us they were well looked after and that staff were very good.

People were asked for their consent before staff provided support or treatment. For example we saw care staff asking people what time they wanted to get up and washed, and what they wanted to do during the day. One person we spoke with didn’t want to be at Greenside Court but told us they understood why they were there as staff had explained this. They also said staff had helped them improve to enable them to be prepared and ready to move onto more suitable accommodation.

During our visit we looked round the home and found people were cared for in an environment that was clean, hygienic and maintained to a good standard. We also found systems were in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

We found there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff employed to meet people’s needs.

We looked at records and found people were protected from unsafe or inappropriate care by means of accurate records in relation to the care and treatment provided.

We spoke with six people who used the service. They told us what it was like to live at this home and described how they were treated by staff and their involvement in making choices about their care. They told us the staff were lovely and they were always well cared for.

We also spoke with three relatives of people who used the service. The relatives told us they were very happy with the care provided. They said they were kept informed about any changes to their relatives care and treatment. Relatives knew how to raise concerns and felt their concerns were acted on swiftly. They also told us there was plenty of staff on duty when they visited and the home was very clean and well maintained.

We also used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. This included observing care, looking at records and talking to staff.

We found medication was administered safely to people. People were given appropriate support where required, to ensure they had taken their medication.

Staff received appropriate support and training to ensure they were able to meet the needs of people living at the home.

Complaints were investigated and responded to in a timely manner.

People we spoke with said staff were friendly, supportive and professional. They told us that they were consulted about their care and were able to make their own decisions about life in the home. People felt staff respected their privacy and dignity and kept personal information confidential.