Queens Park View provides residential care for up to six adults with enduring mental health needs. The home is a large, three storey terraced house, consisting of six single bedrooms and communal areas. Queens Park View is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for six people. At this inspection six people were living there.

At the last inspection the service was rated overall good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.

The provider had failed to notify us that the previous registered manager had left their employment. Although they have now have another manager in post they have yet to register with us.

The manager and provider were approachable and supportive towards people and staff members. People were encouraged to be involved in decisions about Queens Park View and their suggestions were valued by the provider.

People continued to remain safe from the risks of abuse or ill-treatment. This was because staff members knew how to recognise and respond to such concerns.

People were supported by enough staff to meet their needs and people received their medicines safely.

The provider followed safe recruitment procedures when employing new staff members.

Staff members had the training and skills to meet people’s individual needs.

People had care and support plans that reflected the areas of their lives which they needed assistance with. When changes occurred in people’s needs these care and support plans were reviewed to reflect the changes.

People were supported to have choice and control over their lives. They were assisted by staff in the least restrictive way possible. Staff were aware of current guidance which directed their practice and people’s human rights were protected by the staff who supported them.

People received support that continued to be caring. Staff members respected people’s privacy, dignity and promoted independence through personal skill building.

Staff members knew people’s support needs and assisted them as they wanted. People were encouraged to raise any concerns or complaints. The provider had systems in place to address any issues raised with them.

Staff members felt valued as employees and their opinions and ideas were encouraged by the provider. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of service and where necessary made changes to drive improvements.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Queens Park View is a care home providing accommodation for up to six people with a mental health illness. The home is a large semi-detached property situated in a residential area of Bolton. It has gardens to the front and rear of the home and car parking is available at the front of the home. The home offers six single bedrooms. There is a communal lounge, kitchen and dining area and bathrooms and toilets. At the time of our inspection five men were living at the home.

This inspection took place on 17 December 2014 and was unannounced. The last inspection took place on 2 April 2013; we did not identify any concerns with the care provided to people who lived at the home.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the Health and Social care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

On the day of our visit the registered manager was on duty and the provider was also present for some of the time. People living at the home required minimal support. They are able to go out unaccompanied and were encouraged to help the staff with daily living tasks for example cleaning their own rooms and with meal preparation.

We found the home to be warm, clean and tidy. The home was preparing for the Christmas festivities.

We saw that the home had appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures in place for staff to refer to if required. Staff had undertaken training in the protection of vulnerable adults and were able to recognise and report and abuse or poor practice.

The registered manager and the provider had a thorough knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and in Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLs), which is used when a person needs to be deprived of their liberty in their own best interests.

Staffing levels were determined by what commitments and appointments people living at the home had planned.

Robust recruitment systems were in place to help ensure that people were employed following suitable employment checks.

Regular staff supervisions took place and records of supervisions meeting were in seen in the staff files we looked at.

We observed good interactions between staff and people who lived at the home. Staff were seen to treat people with kindness and with respect.

We looked at two care records and these contained information to guide staff how people living at the home wished to be supported, their preferences and wishes.

We saw that the home had systems in place for the safe storage, administration and recording of medicines.

A numbers of audits and checks were carried out on a regular basis to monitor the quality of the service.

We sampled four care files of people who used the service. We found care needs had been effectively assessed and reviewed as required.

A daily record file known as a "grab file" was maintained. This ensured that current information was readily available for care staff, in respect of each person who used the service. This file also contained daily progress records which were comprehensive and gave a good understanding of each days events.

We reviewed staffing rotas and these demonstrated the staffing establishment was consistent and stable. We found that staffing levels had increased to reflect the additional number of people living at Queens Park View.

We sampled four care files and noted that care staff and the person who was receiving care, had a section to sign to confirm that consent was given to the care agreed within the care plan.

We found medicines were appropriately obtained, stored, administered and recorded.

During the inspection we saw appropriate systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. Audits included care plans, medication administration, complaints and compliments and environmental monitoring.

Care was provided in single rooms, with shared communal facilities. Two of the bedrooms were en suite. The home was clean and organised. The aims of the service was to maintain the independence of people as far as possible. Staff provided assistance and prompting with preparation of meals and other daily living tasks such as laundry and shopping.

Daily records were documented and these provided a clear record of day to day events and information that was communicated between staff. We saw an example of how referrals were made in a timely manner when any concerns were raised about the health of any individual. There was evidence that people had access, when needed, to relevant health care professionals, such as dieticians, community psychiatric nurse (CPN) and their GP.

We observed the people who lived at the home to be contented and very relaxed amongst the staff present.

We found there were detailed care plans and assessments in place, which were individualised and person centred. However we did not find evidence that when individuals had capacity, that the individual had consented to the care plan that was implemented.

During the inspection we sampled six staff files. We found that they contained all required employment information which included, application forms, criminal records checks, contracts of employment, references and photo identification.

We spoke with one person who told us, “I have lived here for a good few years now. They look after us well; we do what we want really”.

Another said, “I am very happy here”.

Staff said that they were well supported by the owners of the service who were in regular contact.