Raleigh House is a residential care home for four people with learning disabilities and other needs such as those associated with autism. There were three people living in the home at the time of our visit. Some people had limited verbal communication.

When we last visited the home on 12 December 2014 the service was meeting the regulations we looked at and was rated Good overall and in all five key questions.

At this inspection we found the service continued to be Good.

Risks to people and the premises were managed well. There were enough staff to care for people appropriately and staff were recruited safely. Medicines management was safe. Staff understood how to keep people safe from abuse.

Staff received the right training and support to care for people. People received food and drink of their choice and had access to healthcare they required. Staff were providing care in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff knew the people they were caring for including the best way to communicate with them. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and supported people to build independent living skills.

People were provided with a range activities they were interested in by staff. People’s care plans were current and were involved in their care reviews. A suitable complaints policy was in place and people, relatives and professionals were encouraged to provide feedback on the service to the provider.

Clear line management was in place and the two registered managers and staff understood their roles and responsibilities well. A range of suitable audits were in place to assess and monitor the quality of service delivery.

The service met all the fundamental standards. Further information is in the detailed findings section of the report.

This unannounced inspection took place on 12 December 2014. When we last visited the home on the 3 January 2014 we found the service was meeting the regulations we looked at.

Raleigh House is a care home that provides accommodation and personal care for up to four people with learning disabilities, some of whom had limited verbal communication. At the time of our visit, there were four people living at the home.

The service had two registered managers in post who job share. 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 using the service told us they felt safe. Relatives and professionals commented on the ‘home from home atmosphere’ of the service. On the day of our inspection we found the service to be calm and relaxed.

Staff received regular training and support and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities in caring for people living at Raleigh House. The provider had made sure staff had sufficient skills and experience to do their job effectively. Staff were knowledgeable in recognising signs of potential abuse and the action to take if they suspect people were being abused.

People’s needs were assessed and plans put into place so their needs could be met. This included people’s health needs and making sure they stayed well. Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments and liaised with their GP and other healthcare professionals as required to meet people’s needs. People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts.

All staff that were on duty were caring and attentive. There was a great deal of attention to detail to make sure everyone in the home was well groomed and appropriately dressed.

People who used the service were encouraged to be as independent as possible. There were a range of activities for people to participate in, if they wanted to. People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint if they were not happy with the service they were receiving.

The registered managers were very approachable. People and staff we spoke with told us the registered managers listened to their views and acted on them.

There were four people who lived at Raleigh House and used the services and it was run by ten members of staff on rotation. The number of staff onsite varied depending on the number of activities scheduled for a particular day.

We were only able to conduct short interviews with the people who used the service as their ability to communicate was limited by their medical conditions. However, we spoke with two people; one of whom informed us that they "do like it here". The other person confirmed they were "happy".

We spoke with a family member who informed us that they were "content" and "really proud" of the service. They informed us that there "hadn't been any concerns" and that staff had been "very caring". We also saw that family members had completed surveys and had stated that they were "very satisfied" and that "the needs of the residents were top priority".

We spoke with two members of staff who said they were "happy" working for the service and felt "well supported". One member of staff explained that the managers of the service had been accommodating to their significant commitments outside of work which "helped a lot".

We observed the interactions between staff and people who used ther service. People were treated with care and respect as staff engaged service users in decision making processes.

We found that care plans and records of people as well as the policies for managing the service were up to date, clear and accurate.

We spoke to all of the residents and were shown around the house by two of them. We sat in the lounge with residents and staff and we were told about the residents' lives and activities. One resident said that "this is my home" and another that they "did not want to leave". We observed residents being given choices about the activities they took part in that afternoon. We looked at care plans and other documentation and found that it provided evidence of assessments, guidelines and the management of health conditions, as well as the involvement of residents, their families and external professionals in care planning and support.

We observed the safeguarding policy and examined staff training records. We found that staff had received appropriate induction and training. We found that there were sufficient staff and that they were provided with an induction and mandatory training.