About the service: Imola offers both personal care and accommodation for up to eight people who have learning disabilities. At the time of inspection there were eight people using the service.

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. Risks to people's well-being and safety were assessed, recorded and kept up to date. The service demonstrated a positive approach to supporting people with complex behaviours. The provider had systems in place to enable staff to manage people's medicines safely.

The care service was developed 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.

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. People were supported to maintain good diet and access the health services they needed.

Training relevant to people's support needs had been undertaken by staff. The staff team felt involved in the running of the service and were supported by the registered manager. A complaints procedure was in place.

People were treated with dignity and respect by caring staff. Staff had a very good understanding of the care and support needs of people and had developed positive relationships with them. Staff supported people to develop their independence and people were supported in a personalised way.

The service was effectively managed by a registered manager and deputy manager. They led by example and had a passion for continually driving improvements and placing people at the centre of the service. There was an effective quality assurance system in place to ensure the quality of the service and to drive improvement.

More information is in the detailed findings below.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 07 September 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

The inspection took place on the 9 and 10 August 2016.

Imola is a registered care home providing 24 hour support to eight adults with a learning disability. The service does not provide nursing care. On the day of our inspection the service did not have any vacancies.

The service 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.

People were treated with dignity and respect and staff interacted with people in a kind, caring and sensitive manner. Staff showed a good knowledge of safeguarding procedures and were clear about the actions they would take to protect people.

There was a regular and consistent staff team. The provider had appropriate recruitment checks in place which helped to protect people and ensure staff were suitable to work at the service. There were sufficient numbers of skilled, well trained and qualified staff on duty. Staff told us that they felt well supported in their role. We saw that staff had received training, but some updates were needed. Formal supervision had been regularly provided.

We found that detailed assessments had been carried out and that the care plans were very well developed around each individual’s needs and preferences. There were risk assessments in place and plans on how the risks were to be managed. We saw that appropriate assessments had been carried out where people living at the service were not able to make decisions for themselves; to help ensure their rights were protected. People were supported with taking every day risks and encouraged to take part in daily activities and outings.

People were happy and relaxed with staff. Systems were in place for people to raise concerns and they could be confident they would be listened to and appropriate action was taken.

People’s medication was well managed and this helped to ensure that people received their medication safely. They were supported to be able to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs and were offered choice. We found that people’s healthcare was good. People had access to a range of healthcare providers such as their GP, dentists, chiropodists and opticians.

The provider had effective quality assurance systems in place. People and their relatives were encouraged to feedback on their experiences and staff tried to involve people where possible in day to day decisions and the running of the service. The service was well managed.

We found that the provider had systems in place to maintain the safety and welfare of service users. The service provides staff with specilaised training to ensure the safety of people with specific medical needs.

We found that the service had appropriate arrangements in place to protect people from the risk of abuse. Staff received regular training on safeguarding vulnerable adults and people with learning disabilities. The provider had appropriate arrangements in place for the use of physical interventions and restraint and monitored all incidents closely to ensure people were protected from the risk of inappropriate restraint.

The provider had good arrangements to promote effective performance of the service. We spoke with three members of staff and the registered manager. There was a sufficient number of staff on duty and recruitment of new staff was ongoing. Staff told us they were able to raise issues with their manager and gave examples of the incidents and concerns, such as staffing levels, that they had reported and their concerns were addressed by the manager.

We saw that the registered manager showed clear leadership and that all staff were expected to provide a high quality of care to people. The provider ensured that people’s care was regularly reviewed and that additional provisions to support their care were provided where required.

People using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to communicate with us verbally. We talked with a number of staff in detail about the people at the service and how they liaise with relatives. We found that care was provided according to very detailed care plans, behavioural action plans and risk assessments of the people living in the service.

We observed people being cared for by staff during our visit. People who used the service shared their views through gestures, facial expressions and body language wherever possible. People were engaged in a range of activities, relaxed and comfortable with staff and people around them.

The service was well supported by the provider through extensive training for staff, clear policies and procedures, and regular refurbishment and maintenance of the premises.

People who used the service were not fully protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had not taken reasonable steps to follow up potential safeguarding matters that they had identified. It is important they do this to ensure that concerns are addressed appropriately and are limited as far as possible from happening again.