We inspected the service on 19 November 2018. The inspection was announced. We gave the registered manager 24 hours’ notice of our visit because the service is a small service for four people where people and staff are often out and we wanted to be sure someone would be in.

Quinton House is ‘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 is registered to accommodate two people. Both people were using the service on the day of our inspection visit.

The care service had 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. However, people were given choices and their independence and participation within the local community encouraged.

At our last inspection on 10 February 2016 we rated the service ‘good.’ At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of ‘good’ overall. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People continued to receive a safe service where they were protected from avoidable harm, discrimination and abuse. People told us they felt safe. Risks associated with people’s needs had been assessed and planned for. Risk assessments were reviewed monthly to ensure they reflected people’s most up to date circumstances.

People were supported by a core team of staff who were suitably skilled and experienced staff to meet their needs. The people using the service were supported to be independent and they required mainly prompting rather than ‘hands-on’ support. People were prompted to take their medicines when they needed them.

Safe staff recruitment procedures were in place and used to ensure that only staff who met the services high standards worked there. Incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence and protect people from harm.

People continued to receive an effective service. Staff received the training and support that was specific and relevant to people’s individual needs. People were advised about the importance of a healthy and balanced diet. Staff supported people with their health needs and accompanied them to health care appointments if required.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People’s independence was promoted and they were supported to make informed choices about their care and support.

People continued to receive care from staff who treated them with dignity and respected their privacy. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported. The people and staff had known each other for several years which fostered a family like atmosphere at Quinton House.

People continued to receive care and support that met their needs. People’s needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person and or their relative when required. Care plans were detailed and read by staff when they were updated.

People were supported to pursue their interests and hobbies when they wanted to. Staff respected people’s choices about how they spent their time

There was a complaint procedure in an easy to read format that people could access if they wanted to make a complaint.

The service had a registered manager. They carried out checks to monito

We undertook this inspection to check what improvements the provider had made since our last inspection on 02 September 2013.

We found that people who used the service could be confident that their needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff to provide a consistent level of care.

We found systems in place to gain and review consent from people who used services and where the person using the service lacked capacity, best interest meetings were held in accordance with the law.

We spoke with two people who used services. They both told us they had care plans and received the support they needed from staff.

We saw a survey completed in February 2012. Comments on care were provided by representatives and family or friends of people who lived at the home. One comment included, “my relative is happier as he is not living with so many people. We think that you have helped him a great deal and he has made good progress. He likes the home and enjoys the garden at the home. We feel he looks well and cared for.”

We saw that sometimes there were not many staff available and could not be sure that people’s needs were being adequately met at all times because of this.

We did not see how the provider was making regular assessments of the service provided.

Quinton House provides accommodation and personal care for up to four people living with a learning disability or with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD). On the day of our inspection there were four people living at the home.

The inspection of this service took place on 10 February 2016 and was unannounced.

The home had a registered manager who was on duty on the day of the inspection. 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.

People who used the service told us that they felt safe and well supported. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns that they had about people’s safety. Risks to people were assessed and managed safely.

There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs and staff were recruited through safe recruitment practices. Medicines were stored and administered safely and the premises were well maintained to keep people safe.

Staff received appropriate induction, training and supervision. Staff were very positive about the support and training they received. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and worked well as a team to ensure people’s needs were met effectively. People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were provided with sufficient food and drink to maintain their good health and wellbeing. Health professionals were called upon when required.

Staff were kind and caring. Staff were aware of individual preferences and respected people’s privacy and dignity. People enjoyed a range of activities both at the home and in the community. Some people enjoyed activities independently and some people were supported by staff enabling them to live full and active lives.

People and their relatives (where appropriate) were involved in the development of the service. People felt listened to and would be confident to make a complaint or raise a concern if they needed to. Staff knew the complaints procedure.

People living at the home, and the staff team had opportunities to be involved in discussions about the running of the home and felt the manager provided good leadership. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided.