The inspection took place on 2 March 2017 and was unannounced.

The service provides a residential service for up to 33 people with learning disabilities requiring personal care. There were 25 people living at the home when we visited and 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People appeared at ease and comfortable in the company of staff and responded positively to staff. Staff understood what it meant to protect a person from harm and to keep them safe and had received training and guidance on the subject. Staff recruited to work at the home underwent checks of their background to ensure the registered manager had enough information to make a decision about their suitability for working at the home. People were supported to take their medicines as they needed and regular checks were made to ensure people received the support they needed.

Staff had access to training and supervision to enable them to support people. The provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The provisions of the MCA are used to protect people who might not be able to make informed decisions on their own about the care or treatment they receive. People were offered choices in the meals prepared for them and supported to maintain a healthy diet. Where people required the support of additional health professionals to support their wellbeing, people were helped to access this support.

People were supported by a team that understood the registered provider’s expectation of care. We saw systems that had been embedded to review and monitor people’s care. Where action was required by either staff or the management team, this was highlighted on the computer system so that all necessary tasks were completed. People’s care was also reviewed to check for trends, so that if adjustments were needed to people’s care, these could be made.

People told us they were happy living at the home and supported by caring staff. People’s independence was promoted. Visitors were welcome to see their family members or friends when they wanted.

Quality audits were undertaken by the registered manager and the provider to develop people’s care further. The provider and registered manager took account of people’s views and suggestions to make sure planned improvements focused on people’s experiences.

The inspection took place on 19 March 2015 and was unannounced.

The service provides a residential service for up to 33 people with learning disabilities requiring personal care. There were 30 people living at the home when we visited and 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they felt safe and relatives told us they felt their family members were safe. Staff were also able to tell us about how they kept people safe. During our inspection we observed that staff were available to meet people’s care and social needs. People received their medicines as prescribed and at the correct time and medication records (MARS sheets) were accurate and up to date.

People’s privacy and dignity were respected and we saw people were treated in a manner that they or their relatives would want them for them. Families told us their relatives received consistent care.

We found that people’s health care needs were assessed, and care planned and delivered to meet those needs. People had access to other healthcare professionals that provided treatment. Advice and guidance to support their health needs was sought when needed.

People were sufficiently supported to eat and drink to keep them healthy. People had access to a range of snacks and drinks during the day and had choices at mealtimes. Where people had special dietary requirements we saw that these were provided.

Staff were provided with training through a variety of methods and were able to demonstrate how they had benefitted from the training by supporting people, with a clear understanding of what was required to care for someone safely. The registered manager told us that all staff received training and training requirements were regularly.

People and their families were positive about the care they received and about the staff who looked after them. This was supported by the records we reviewed and our observations throughout the day. People’s care and activities were tailored to their individual needs and preferences and staff responded positively to meeting those needs. Staff and relatives told us that they would raise concerns with senior staff or the registered manager and were confident that any concerns were dealt with.

The provider and registered manager made regular monthly checks to monitor the quality of the care that people received and looked at where improvements may be needed. The registered manager regularly attended review meetings, this enabled the registered manager to keep in contact with families as well as understand peoples individuals changing care needs. Relatives told us that care and communication from staff was consistent and open.

When we inspected AALPS we met a number of young people who used the service. We were not able to speak to many people in detail due to their verbal communication difficulties. We spent time in parts of the service. We were able to see how staff interacted with people. We spoke with the acting manager and members of staff. We were also able to speak with four relatives of people who used the service. Relatives told us that the service was: “First class” and that staff were: “Approachable” and: “Willing to listen”.

We found that staff had an understanding of the needs of people and they supported them to meet those needs. Steps had been taken so that care was planned and delivered in a way that met people's needs.

We found that people were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had a kind and caring approach towards the people they supported.

Staff received training provided by the provider which assisted them to meet and support people’s needs. The formal supervision of staff had taken place to provide staff with support.

The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service that people received. This was to make sure that appropriate care was provided.

In this report the name of one registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. The name appears because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.

When we visited AALPS College West Midlands we met eight people who lived there. At the time of our visit there were 28 people living at the college, two of which were under 18 years old. Some of them were not able to tell us about their experience of living at the college due to their condition but others were.

We looked at a small number of bedrooms where people had given us permission. We saw that the rooms reflected each person’s individual choice, interests and needs. In one room, a board had been provided with tactile movable objects because it was recognised that the person using the room liked to move and sort objects.

When we met people we found they were well presented and had been engaged in pastimes and activities of their choice. People told us they were asked about the support they wanted and needed. One person told us, “I like my support staff and I can choose how I spend my time”.

A behaviour specialist who supported one person had completed a survey for the service. In this they wrote, “The person I work with is being supported well at AALPS and is making progress in many areas. The staff have been responsive to any suggestions that have been made by the person’s mother or myself”.

We met one person who had one worker assigned to them each day for support. The person told us their plan for the day which had included a trip to a bird watching sanctuary. They told us they were building a bird watching hide in the woodwork facilities which they would then use in the college grounds. The person showed us their pet and spoke positively about life at the service and their future plans.

We saw that staff were friendly, courteous and respectful towards people who lived at the service. They provided one to one attention in an unhurried way. The atmosphere was calm and staff showed an awareness of people’s support and emotional needs. One person told us, “The staff don’t come into my room unless I say they can, they leave me alone when I want some space”. Another person said, “Obviously some staff are more popular than others. We know we have to share the staff, but we would be listened to if we said there was someone we did not like supporting us. I prefer the staff who have more get up and go”.

When we carried out our inspection care and support was provided to 26 people all of whom were over 18 years old.

We spoke with the registered manager, the acting manager, head of service, the day services' manager, flat managers, team leaders and support workers. We spoke with a small number of people who used the service. During our inspection many people who used the service had gone out to take part in activities. We observed the care and support provided to some people. One person who used the service told us that staff supported them with: “Independent living”.

We found that staff had a good awareness of the needs of people they cared for and supported.

We found that people received their medicines. The records to evidence that people had received their medicines were not however always fully maintained.

Systems were in place to ensure that people employed to work at the service were checked to ensure their suitability prior to them starting work.

We found that improvements were needed to ensure that people’s records were maintained and up to date. This meant that people were at risk of receiving inappropriate care and support.