This inspection was carried out on 7 November 2017 and was unannounced. At their last inspection on 1 December 2015, they were found to be meeting the standards we inspected. At this inspection we found that they had continued to meet all the standards.

Life opportunities trust-6a Sewells is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service accommodates seven people in one adapted building. The care service has been developed and designed 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.

The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People felt safe and staff were aware of how they needed to maintain people’s safety/ this was in relation to medicines, individual risks, the environment and going out. There were sufficiently trained staff to meet people’s needs and they felt supported by the management team.

People were supported in a person centred way which included meeting their care needs and in relation to hobbies and interests. Care plans were detailed and people were involved in developing these.

People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff worked in a way that demonstrated they treated the service as people’s homes and they told us this was the ethos of the management team. People and their relatives told us that they did not have any complaints but felt confident to raise any issues if they arose.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and this included involving people in, and listening to people about, the running of the home. People, their relatives and staff told us that they felt the service was well run.

This inspection was carried out on 1 December 2015 and was unannounced.

Life Opportunities Trust- 6a Sewells provides accommodation and personal care for up to seven people with varying learning and physical needs. There were seven people living at the service on the day of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post, however, they were on a temporary secondment for the organisation in a different role and the home was being managed by an acting manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection on 3 June 2013, the service was found to be meeting the standards. At this inspection we found they had continued to meet the standards. However, the home did not always send notifications to the CQC as required and this was an area that required improvement.

The Mental Capacity Act (2005) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that as far as possible people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. Where they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. The application procedures for this in care homes and hospitals are called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS)

We checked whether the service was working in line with the principles of the MCA and whether any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty were being met. We found that most people living at the service were able to make their own decisions and those who were unable had their capacity assessed. The manager and staff understood their roles in relation to DoLS. DoLS applications for people who received constant supervision were pending an outcome.

People told us that they received care that met their needs in a way that they preferred. People were involved in planning their care and deciding how they spent their time. Activities were based around people’s hobbies and interests.

People were positive about the food and were involved in preparing meals. There was regular health and social care involvement. People were positive about the staff and there were established relationships between people and staff. Staff knew people well. People’s feedback was sought and complaints were acted upon.

Staff had received appropriate training and supervision. There was effective leadership and guidance in the home. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and address any issues identified.

We spoke with four of the six people who lived at the home. They told us that care workers always asked for their permission before providing them with any care. They also told us that they were happy with the care and support that they received. One person told us, "They [the care workers] are nice and helpful." Another person said, "I get very good care."

People told us that there were a lot of activities for them to take part in. One person told us that they went to the YMCA three times a week. Another person said that they had a cat and went shopping every week to buy food for themselves and their cat.

We saw that people chose what they wanted to eat. We looked at a book of photographs that were used for people to plan the menu for each week. One person who cooked their own food did their shopping themselves at a local supermarket and was encouraged to buy fresh fruit and vegetables.

We saw that on the day of our inspection the home was clean and bright. We looked at all of the bedrooms, the lounge, dining area, kitchen and bathrooms and found these to be clean and dust free.

The home had 10 permanent day staff, four permanent night staff and 14 bank staff. However, the home did sometimes employ agency staff to ensure that the staff levels were maintained. The home ensured that the agency care workers were qualified to provide care to the people who lived there.

We saw that people's records were completed fully and were up to date.

During our visit on 17 July 2012 we spoke with two people who use the service and observed care for a further three people. They told us that generally they were happy in the home. One person showed us their room and proudly told us, “I have all I need here.” Talking about staff, they said: ”Staff are brilliant. I do not say this just to say it, they really are. They are well trained and know how to help me. They listen to me and respect me.” Both people who we spoke with told us that they felt safe and protected in the home.

People told us that they knew about their care plans. One person confirmed that they were asked for their comments about their care plan and stated that they signed when reviews took place.

Both people confirmed that they were consulted about the quality of the service and one of them stated, “Yes, I remember filling in the survey form, but they ask me all the time if I am happy with everything here.”

We observed three more people who were not able to communicate verbally being engaged and supported by the staff to greet us, shake hands and showing us that they were relaxed and comfortable; all three of them smiled at us.