We carried out an unannounced inspection on 8 May 2017.

Old Station Close is a residential care home that provides care for up to 21 people who live with learning disabilities and mental health. The building is purpose built with accommodation in three distinct areas, all with single rooms with and en-suite facility. People have access to a landscaped garden. At the time of our inspection 21 people were using the service.

At our last inspection in March 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection we found that the service continued to be ‘Good’.

People continued to receive safe care. All staff, including care workers and domestic staff knew how to recognise and report any signs that people were abused or at risk of abuse.

The provider had assessed risks relating to people’s care to help them to remain safe whilst encouraging them to be as independent as they wanted to be. The provider had procedures in place for staff to report concerns and for those concerns to be investigated and acted upon.

Staff were appropriately recruited and there were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs. People were supported to receive their medicines safely.

The care that people received continued to be effective. Staff had access to the support, supervision and training that they required to work effectively in their roles. People were supported with their nutritional and health needs and were supported to access health services when they needed to.

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 developed positive relationships with the staff that were caring and treated them with respect, kindness and dignity.

People consistently experienced care and support from staff which helped them to achieve their aspirations to lead more independent lives. People’s needs were met in line with their individual care plans and assessed needs.

People and their relatives felt they could raise a concern and the provider had systems to manage any complaints that they may receive.

The provider had effective arrangements for monitoring and assessing the quality of care people experienced. These included seeking and acting upon the views for people who used the service, their relatives, staff and health professionals who visited the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The service provides accommodation for up to 21 people with mental health needs. The service is located in a residential area of Shepshed. The premises comprise of three self-contained buildings with ensuite bedrooms and communal kitchen and lounges. At the time of our inspection 20 people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff understood and put into practice the provider’s procedures for safeguarding people from abuse and avoidable harm. They advised people using the service about how to keep safe in the home and when they were out enjoying activities. People knew how to raise concerns. The provider had enough suitably skilled staff to be able to meet the needs of people using the service. Staff prompted people to take their own medicines. The provider had effective arrangements for the safe management of medicines.

People using the service were supported by staff who had received relevant and appropriate training. This meant staff understood the needs of people they supported. Staff were supported through effective supervision and training. Staff understood the relevance to their work of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They sought people’s consent before they provided care and support.

Staff supported people with their nutritional needs by providing information about balanced diets and healthy eating. They supported people to prepare their own meals. People were supported to access the relevant health services when they needed to.

People using the service told us that staff were considerate and caring. People were able to enjoy a variety of meaningful activities that reflected their hobbies and interests. People were supported by care workers who understood their needs. People were involved in the assessments of their needs and in reviews of their plan of care. People were provided with information about their care and support options and were involved in decisions about their care and support. Care worker’s respected people’s privacy and dignity.

People’s plans of care were centred on their specific needs. Those plans had agreed aims and objectives which care workers helped people to achieve. People knew how to raise concerns if they needed to. People we spoke with were very pleased with the care and support they had experienced.

The provider had aims and objectives that were understood by staff and people using the service. They had effective procedures for monitoring and assessing the quality of service that promoted continuous improvement.

We spoke with four people who used the service and three members of staff. We also reviewed four care records, four staff files and four training records.

We saw evidence that consent was gained for specific care and support. For example, we saw in one care record that consent was gained for unsupported leave and an advance statement of who to contact in the event of deterioration in capacity to make informed decisions. Another record clearly showed that consent had been sought to agree the introduction of a special diet.

All the people we spoke with told us they felt well cared for. One person told us: “I am happy and well care for”. Another person told us: “They are kind and care for me well”.

People told us they had a choice of what they wished to eat and that on the whole the food was enjoyable. One person told us: “We have choices of meals and if we do not like what is on offer they will make us something else.”

We asked staff about their work pattern and saw a daily and weekly cleaning schedule. Staff explained to us they had a programme of tasks to be completed on a daily and weekly basis. We noted that on completion of the task the staff signed to confirm the task had been done.

We saw documented evidence that supervision and appraisal sessions had taken place. We spoke to a number of staff and asked them to describe the support they received to enable them to carry out their duties. All told us they were well supported.

People told us they were well cared for and kept safe. They also told us that the provider encouraged them to remain independent and to do things for themselves, but they knew they would always get help if they asked for it.

We found Old Station Close to be well maintained and it provided a welcoming environment. The care we observed being delivered to people using the service was supportive and appropriate. We found evidence of cooperation between the care home and external health professionals and this ensured that care was delivered in a manner that best suited individual care needs.

Because some of the people who live at the home have limited communication, we were unable to ascertain what a number people felt about their experiences.

We observed from a distance how members of staff talked with people throughout the visit. This was done with privacy and dignity in mind and showed the staffs’ awareness of individual support needs.

People using the service indicated in the 2010 Quality Assurance questionnaire, stated the following, “I enjoy all the meals I have at Old Station Close”, “ meeting the manager on a regular basis with other residents only, could really help”, “food very good Activities” (these comments were made anonymously and therefore could not be followed up).

Relatives that completed the 2010 Quality Assurance questionnaire, stated the following, “Really happy with Old Station Close”, “usually a excellent service” and “Cigarette ends over the place, when lights go wrong – slow to be put right, security an issue, this person also stated deco was poor in some areas. These comments were again made anonymously, the issues were followed up but it was not possible to confirm these were done to the complainants’ satisfaction.

We spoke with the staff group and found they were aware of how to safeguard people and how to recognise different forms of abuse. Staff also told us about the training they received before they commenced working with vulnerable people, and the ongoing training to date. They also spoke about the support they received through meetings and personal supervision, and added they felt the staffing numbers were appropriate for the current group of people using the service.