Jasmine House is a residential care home which provides support for up to seven adults who have learning disabilities. The home is situated in a residential area of Fazakerley, close to local amenities. The home has seven separate bedrooms, shower rooms and bathrooms, two lounge areas, dining area, kitchen area, conservatory, large rear garden and an activity centre. The home provides accommodation over three floors and has been adapted to support people who are physically disabled.

At the last inspection, in January 2015 the service was rated Good, with the ‘Effective’ domain rated as ‘Outstanding’.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good, with the effective domain continuing to remain outstanding.

The home operated within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We were provided with information in relation to capacity assessments and processes which needed to be in place to make decisions in a person’s best interest. 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 supported this practice.

Medication was administered safely by staff who had received the appropriate training. Medication records were accurate, medication audits and competency assessments were conducted on a monthly basis, systems were in place to order repeat medication, dispose of medication and annual medication reviews were conducted for all people who lived at the home.

All care files contained individual care plans and risk assessments which were regularly reviewed and updated in order to minimise risk. Care plans were person centred and contained relevant information in relation to a person’s wishes, choices and preferences.

Risk assessments were in place for all seven people who lived at the home. The assessments offered key information about significant areas of risk and how such situations would need to be managed for the safety of everyone living at the home.

Staff expressed how they were fully supported in their roles; they had completed all mandatory training as well as specialist training in order to fulfil their roles effectively. Staff were receiving regular supervisions as well as annual appraisals.

A formal complaints process was visible around the home but relatives explained that any complaints or concerns could be openly discussed with the staff and managers as and when they needed to be.

The registered manager had a number of different systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the home, ensuring that people were receiving safe, compassionate and effective care. Such systems included weekly, monthly, annual audits, staff and ‘resident meetings’ as well as resident questionnaires, stakeholder surveys and relevant health and safety and infection control checks.

We found that people who used the service had care plans detailing their assessed needs and how they were to be met. People told us that the staff knew them well and provided them with all the care and support they needed. People were supported and encouraged to develop daily living skills and they lead active lives both at home and in the community.

Staff had a good understanding of people's dietary needs and had received training in the use of equipment people required to help with their diet. People who used the service ate meals which were healthy and well balanced and they knew the importance of a healthy diet. People told us they helped buy their food from local supermarkets, were involved in planning their menus and had helped prepare their meals.

Medication was stored and administered in the right way and people received medication at the right times. Staff had access to important information about people's medication including why it was prescribed and possible side effects.

People had information about how to complain and they told us they were confident about complaining if they needed to. We found that no complaints had been received about the service.

People's personal records which were kept at the home were stored securely, well maintained and up to date. The records included sufficient information which showed that people's health and well-being had been closely monitored.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people living at Jasmine House. This was because some of the people using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. We were able to speak individually with three of the people who told us they were happy living at the home. Some comments made included, “I help around the house”. “I really like living here and everybody is friendly and kind”. “The staff know me well”.

We also spoke with relatives of people using the service, who commented:

“The staff are wonderful, I am really happy with the care and support my daughter receives at Jasmine House”.

“I have visited unannounced on a number of occasions and have always found everything to be fine”.

“The staff are really patient and caring”. "They have improved so much since moving there".

We found people had been involved in decisions made about their care and treatment and that people had been treated with dignity and respect. People received care and support appropriate to their needs and which ensured their safety.

People had been protected from the risk of abuse and staff were confident about dealing with incidents which may occur.

Staff had been properly recruited to ensure they were suitable to work at the home.

The provider regularly monitored the quality of the service provided to ensure it had been run in the best interests of people using the service.

We spoke with five people who were living at Jasmine House. They were all very positive about living there and all said that staff were very good, polite and respectful.

People told us they had always been asked their views and opinions about their care and support and had been involved in making choices and decisions about all aspects of their lives and the running of the home.

People using the service told us that they were involved in all aspects of their care and treatment and that they had a care plan, which knew about.

People using the service also told us that staff are good and treat them well and with respect.

People told us that they take part in a lot of different activities in the community and at home.

People using the service told us that they liked living at the home and that they felt safe.

They told us that the staff were very good and had always treated them well.

People told us that they had been given information about what to do if they are worried about their care and treatment at the home. They said they would always tell somebody if they were worried.

Jasmine House is a residential care home which provides support for up to seven adults who have learning disabilities. The home is situated in a residential area of Fazakerley, close to local amenities. The home has seven separate bedrooms, shower rooms and bathrooms, two lounge areas, dining area, kitchen area, conservatory, large rear garden and an activity centre. The home provides accommodation over three floors and has been adapted to support people who are physically disabled.

At the last inspection, in January 2015 the service was rated Good, with the ‘Effective’ domain rated as ‘Outstanding’.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good, with the effective domain continuing to remain outstanding.

The home operated within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We were provided with information in relation to capacity assessments and processes which needed to be in place to make decisions in a person’s best interest. 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 supported this practice.

Medication was administered safely by staff who had received the appropriate training. Medication records were accurate, medication audits and competency assessments were conducted on a monthly basis, systems were in place to order repeat medication, dispose of medication and annual medication reviews were conducted for all people who lived at the home.

All care files contained individual care plans and risk assessments which were regularly reviewed and updated in order to minimise risk. Care plans were person centred and contained relevant information in relation to a person’s wishes, choices and preferences.

Risk assessments were in place for all seven people who lived at the home. The assessments offered key information about significant areas of risk and how such situations would need to be managed for the safety of everyone living at the home.

Staff expressed how they were fully supported in their roles; they had completed all mandatory training as well as specialist training in order to fulfil their roles effectively. Staff were receiving regular supervisions as well as annual appraisals.

A formal complaints process was visible around the home but relatives explained that any complaints or concerns could be openly discussed with the staff and managers as and when they needed to be.

The registered manager had a number of different systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the home, ensuring that people were receiving safe, compassionate and effective care. Such systems included weekly, monthly, annual audits, staff and ‘resident meetings’ as well as resident questionnaires, stakeholder surveys and relevant health and safety and infection control checks.