10 West Street is registered to accommodate and deliver personal care to one person. People who live there may have a learning disability or autism. At the time of our inspection there was one person living in the home. At the last inspection in February 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

Staff continued to deliver care that was safe and took account of risks that might affect people’s safety. Staff were recruited in a safe way and there were still enough staff to keep people safe. The arrangements for managing people’s medicines remained safe and people had their medicines in the way they were prescribed.

People continue to receive effective support from staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their specific needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People continued to receive a caring and compassionate approach to their needs which included involving them in decisions and providing them with information in a way they understood. People’s privacy, dignity and independence was respected.

The service continued to be responsive to how people’s needs were best met which included decisions about their living arrangements. Relatives continued to be happy with their involvement and knew how to raise complaints if they had any concerns about the service.

The service continued to be well-led with appropriate checks and audits in place to check that the quality of the service was maintained. Arrangements both formal and informal were in place to obtain people’s views about the service and make any improvements.

The provider is registered to accommodate and deliver personal care to a one person. People who live there may have a learning disability or associated need.

Our inspection was announced and took place on 11 February 2015.

At our last inspection in April 2013 the provider was meeting all of the regulations that we assessed.

A manager was registered with us as is required by law. 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.

Relatives we spoke with said that people received a safe service. We found that there were clear procedures in place to ensure that people received a service that was safe; staff followed the procedures to ensure the risk of harm to people was reduced this ensured that people received care and support in a safe way. We found that where people received support from staff with taking prescribed medicines, this was done in a way that ensured the risk to people was minimised.

Relatives told us that they felt that there were enough staff employed to meet their family member’s needs and offer them a reliable and flexible service. Relatives felt the staff that supported people were trained and competent. We saw that staff received the training development and support needed to ensure they did their job well and provided an effective service.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We found that the registered manager was meeting the requirements set out in the MCA and DoLS to ensure that people received care in line with their best interests and were not unlawfully restricted.

We found that the person participated in a range of recreational activities in the community that they enjoyed and benefitted from.

The person was encouraged to maintain their daily living skills and be as independent as possible.

Relatives told us that staff supported their family member with their nutrition and health care needs. They also told us they had a good relationship with the staff. We found that people were able to make decisions about their care and they and their families were actively involved in how their care was planned and delivered. A process was in place for people and their relatives to raise any concerns or dissatisfaction.

Relatives spoken with said the quality of service was good. The management of the service was stable and processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service.

There was one person living at the home on the day of our visit. The person was not able to communicate with us for any length of time, due to their learning disability, so we observed their care and how staff interacted with them throughout our visit.

We saw that staff treated the person with respect and dignity and understood how to communicate with them. We spoke to the person about the home and they put their thumbs up indicating that they were happy living there. We spoke to a relative who said, "Our family is very happy with the care here."

We saw that records provided clear and up to date information for staff to follow so they could assist the person to meet their individual needs in the way that they preferred and encouraged to maintain their independence and develop new skills. A relative said, "He has improved so much since he has been here.’’

The person was supported to maintain activities that were interesting and stimulating so that they had a meaningful lifestyle. We saw that the person was safe in the environment they lived in. The person had a good rapport with staff and staff knew their individual needs.

Staff received a range of training so that they had up to date knowledge and skills in order to support the person who lived there. A relative said, "There are never any problems with the staff, they are great." There were robust systems in place to monitor the home, to ensure the person received a quality service.

There was one person living at the home on the day of our visit. No one knew we

would be visiting. The person was not able to communicate with us for any length of time, due to their learning disability, so we observed their care and how staff interacted with them throughout our visit. We spoke to two members of staff and a relative.

We saw that staff treated the person with respect and dignity and understood how to communicate with them. Information was available in the home in a way that the person could understand. We spoke to the person about the home and they put their thumbs up indicating that they were happy living there. We spoke to a visitor who said “I am happy with the care here”.

We saw that records provided clear and up to date information for staff to follow so they could assist the person to meet their individual needs in the way that they preferred. The person was encouraged to maintain their independence and develop new skills. A relative said “He has come on a lot, he can do different things now”.

The person was encouraged and assisted to eat a balanced diet. The person who lived at the home was supported to maintain activities that were interesting and stimulating so that they had a meaningful lifestyle.

We saw that the person was safe in the environment they lived in. The person had a good rapport with staff and staff knew their individual needs.

Staff received a range of training so that they had up to date knowledge and skills in

order to support the person who lived there. A relative said “There are never any problems with the staff, they are lovely”.

There were robust systems in place to monitor the home, to ensure the person received a quality service.