Morton House is a residential care home for fourteen people with epilepsy, learning and physical disabilities. The accommodation is spread over two floors with lift access to the first floor. At the time of this inspection eleven people were living there.

At the last inspection in May 2015, the service was rated good.

At this inspection we found the service remained good.

Why the service is rated good:

People and their relatives were happy with the care provided. They felt the home provided good care to people as a result of having established, experienced and caring staff who were supported by a dedicated manager. Professionals felt the home worked well with them.

Systems were in place to keep people safe. Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities. Risks to people’s personal safety had been assessed and plans were in place to minimise these risks. Peoples’ medicines were managed and administered safely. Staff were suitably recruited. Staffing levels were not sufficient to meet people’s needs. This was being addressed by the registered manager. Confirmation was received following the inspection that the staffing levels in the morning shift had increased to ensure people’s needs could be met in a timely manner.

Staff were inducted, trained and supported in their roles. Formal one to one supervisions and annual appraisals of staff were taking place but not in line with the organisations policy. This had been identified by the manager and was being addressed. People’s health and nutritional needs were met. Areas of the home had been refurbished and the organisation was considering how the environment could be improved to meet people’s changing needs. Quotes were being obtained to source specific moving and handling equipment, to ensure people’s safety.

People were actively involved in making choices and decisions about their care, treatment and issues which affected them as a group. Care, treatment and support plans were personalised. People’s needs were reviewed regularly and as required. Person centred activities were provided. People and their relatives were able to raise concerns and felt confident they would be addressed.

Staff were described as kind, caring, engaging and sociable. The home had an established staff team who knew people well. They treated people as individuals and showed them respect. They promoted people’s privacy, dignity and created a warm homely relaxed environment for people.

The home had an experienced manager who had developed a cohesive staff team that worked well together. The manager was actively involved in the day to day running of the home as well as being proactive in identifying and addressing issues with the organisation such as staffing levels and the environment. Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality of service being delivered and the running of the home.

We looked at the personal care and treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 4th December 2013, observed how people were cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked to staff. We talked to a visiting professional and two relatives.

People told us that they were involved in the planning of their care and understood the care and treatment choices available to them. One person said ““I always have my hair done once a week and the staff let me book the hairdresser on my own. I have all the appointments booked until Christmas because having my hair nice makes me feel good.” The care plans reflect people’s choices and involvement in their care.

One relative told us “the carers are fantastic and supported our relative and us when our relative was in hospital.”

The home was clean and peoples rooms were all individualised reflecting their choices. One room was covered in a person’s favourite football colours. The cleaning schedule was comprehensive and all staff took responsibility to check standards. A staff member described the management and support of a recent infection incident demonstrating a good understanding of infection control.

People who used the service spoke highly of the choice and quality of the food. The chef took great pride in the cleanliness of the kitchen and the design of the menu.

People who used services were involved in their medicine regime. Individual medicine lockers were in each bedroom. Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines and this was confirmed through training records and observation.

People who used services were consulted on their views and suggestions to improve services. The staff were consulted in the provision of services in adverse weather conditions to ensure a good level of staff cover. The management team were including outside expertise to help develop their service.

People who use the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. One person told us "I am given choice here" another person told us "I choose what I like to eat and when I get up and go to sleep." People experienced care and support that met their needs and protected their rights. Their care plans were individualised and reflected people's specific needs, interests and wishes.

Care and support was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare. We saw individualised risks relating to the person had been identified and these risks had been reviewed by the manager on a monthly basis. People who we spoke with described the care as "good", "very good" and "fantastic".

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. People using the service told us that they felt safe at the home and said if there were any concerns they would report to the care staff or the manager.

The three people we spoke with told us that staff had the skills and knowledge to support them effectively. People told us that they would contact the manager or care staff if they had any complaints to make. Comments included "I have not had the need to complain" and "the staff are marvellous, I have no reason to complain."

People who use the service told us they were involved in day to day decisions which included their choice and decision of food, activities and holidays. They told us that staff promote their privacy, dignity and call them by their preferred name. They also told us they gave their consent of the care and treatment they received. They told us that they were happy with the care provided. They get to see doctors, dentists, opticians and nurses regularly.

People told us that they have good access to a range of leisure activities and holidays. They thought that the meals were good and they were given enough to eat.

They confirmed that they were given two choices each meal and were involved in the menu planning.

People told us that the home was kept clean and that staff helped them keep their bedrooms clean. They told us that they liked living there. They also said that staff gave them their medication. They thought there was always enough staff available to support them. They said that house meetings took place which allowed them to raise issues that concerned them. They told us that they knew who to talk to if any person treated them badly. They told us they knew how to make a complaint and that issues raised were dealt with.

Morton House is a care home which provides accommodation and personal care for up to 16 people with epilepsy, learning and/or physical disabilities.

At the time of our inspection there were thirteen people living in the home. There was 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.

The inspection took place on the 5 and 6 May 2015. The inspection was unannounced. We spoke with seven people living at the home and six staff which included the registered manager. We spoke with five relatives by telephone after the inspection.

People told us they felt safe. Relatives were confident that their relatives were safe. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people and policies were in place to promote safe practices.

People who used the service and relatives were happy with the care provided. Relatives described the care as fantastic and the best care you could possibly have. They felt their relatives were happy there and one relative commented “It is like one big family”.

Risks to people, staff and visitors were identified and managed. Medicines were safely managed. Care plans were in place which provided guidance for staff on how people were to be supported. We saw people were supported appropriately.

Safe recruitment procedures were in operation. Staff were suitably inducted, trained and supervised to ensure they were effective in meeting people’s needs. The home had an established staff team who worked well together to benefit people. They had a good understanding of people’s needs and provided person centred care. Safe staffing levels were maintained and the rota was flexible to accommodate appointments and activities. We saw staff were kind, caring and responsive to people’s needs

People’s independence was promoted and they were provided with the information to enable them to make choices and decisions.

People’s health needs were met and they were provided with varied well balanced appetising meals. They had access to a range of activities.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the home and gain feedback from people who used the service and their relatives.

People, staff and relatives told us the home was well managed. They were happy with the way the home was run and found the registered manager to be accessible and approachable. One relative commented “The registered manager is incredibly approachable, they are reassuring and provides them with confidence that their relative is well looked after”. The registered manager took an active role in the day to day running of the home. They provided hands on care as well as providing guidance and support to staff.

We received feedback from three health professionals involved with the home. They confirmed people got safe, effective care. They told us staff were caring, responsive and the service was well managed.