We rated Kirkwood Road as Good because:

• Staff provided a safe and clean environment for all those who used the service by supporting people to keep their flats clean and tidy and keeping the communal areas in good condition. Staff adhered to infection control principles and equipment was well maintained. Medicines were stored securely and staff provided people who used the service with information regarding their treatment options. Staff regularly assessed and monitored the risks to people who used the service and kept updated action plans on how to manage risks.

• The service supported the independent living of people who used the service by providing each person with fully furnished private accommodation that met their needs.

• There were enough qualified and experienced staff to meet the needs of people who used the service. Staff demonstrated their commitment to supporting independent living through their positive attitude to their work and in the way they communicated and worked with people who used the service. Those people we spoke with said that staff were caring and supportive. Staff took time to ensure that people using the service understood their options regarding care, treatment welfare and housing rights and further supported them make choices to in respect of those options.

• The care plans drawn up by staff for people who used the service were detailed, up to date, person-centred and showed a clear commitment to meet people’s individual needs. Staff liaised effectively with external agencies, including GPs, welfare and housing services and organisations providing activities to help support people’s recovery.

• Staff met regularly to review the care needs and risk assessments of all those who used the service and handover meetings between staff members on different shifts discussed people’s needs in detail.

• Staff received continued supervision and support from management and there were opportunities for staff development. Morale among staff at the service was good and the staff members we spoke with were enthusiastic about their work and the support they received. There were action plans in place to monitor the development and quality of the service and managers met regularly to review the progress of these plans.

However:

• There was evidence that some staff members did not understand what situations could indicate that someone might be at risk of serious harm, meaning that they did not respond appropriately to one particular incident at the service. Staff did also not appropriately update the risk assessment of a person using the service following this incident.

• Although there was evidence that staff explained to people who used the service what happened when things went wrong, the provider did not have a policy to instruct staff regarding their legal duty of candour to inform and apologise for things going wrong in specific circumstances. Staff were not aware of this duty and had not received training in it. Also, although some people who used the service were treated in the community under the Mental Health Act staff did not receive up to date training in the Act to help ensure they understood those people’s rights.

• Although staff planned people’s care and treatment in detail, there was no evidence of discharge planning in the care records of 10 of the 12 people who used the service.

• While there were detailed plans for the development of the service, these plans did not contain specific and measurable outcomes to allow staff to identify whether those plans had been successful.