The inspection took place on 3 January 2018 and was announced. We gave the registered provider very short notice of our inspection as we wanted to make sure someone would be at the service on the day of our inspection. The last comprehensive inspection took place in October 2015 when the registered provider was meeting the regulations. You can read the report from our last inspections, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Sandringham Road’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Sandringham Road is a six bedded care home providing care and support for people living with a learning disability. The service is located in the Doncaster suburb of Intake. The service is close to public transport links and local amenities. Staff working at the home are employed by Rotherham, Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust.

At the time of our inspection 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. However, the registered manager had recently moved to another location within the company and a new manager had begun in post. These changes occurred on the 1 January 2018. As the changes were so current, the registered manager attended the inspection to support the new manager.

Systems were in place to safeguard people from abuse. Staff told us they would report abuse straight away. The service had sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs in a timely way. Care records included risk assessments which assisted staff in supporting people whilst minimising any risks associated with their care. People received their medicines in a safe way. However, we found that the room used to store medicines was slightly above the recommended temperature for storing medicines. We raised this with the registered manager and the new manager who were looking at ways to reduce the temperature of the room.

Staff training took place and staff felt supported to carry out their role. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. We found the registered provider to be compliant with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We saw people were offered choice and they were respected. People had access to healthcare professionals as required and their support was sought without delay.

People who used the service and the staff team got on well together. Staff showed kindness and a caring manner in their interactions with people. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

People received personalised care which was responsive to their needs. Care plans were in place which detailed the support people required. The registered provider had a complaints procedure.

The management team consisted of a new manager, deputy manager, and a team of senior care workers. The management team offered support and guidance to the rest of the staff team. Systems were in place to ensure policies and procedures were being followed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

During the SOFI we saw how staff members interacted with people who used the service. The staff appeared to know the people they were working with really well and were respectful of their wishes and feelings.

We found that where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

People were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

There was an effective complaints system available.

We observed that people experienced care delivered in a patient and supportive manner, and staff ensured that people received information about what was happening around them and explained care tasks before they were carried out.

Each person had received a thorough and detailed assessment of their needs. Where support needs had been identified, appropriate care plans had been devised to direct staff in the correct way to provide care to people.

Records described how people should be cared for and supported. They were regularly reviewed to ensure that they remained relevant to people’s needs. They contained sufficient detail so that staff understood how to meet people’s needs and deliver care in a safe and appropriate manner.

Care plans contained information about whether people had been involved in making decisions about their care and support. Where people’s disability made involvement difficult, there was information about the steps that staff should take to promote involvement.

We gave the provider some feedback about areas where record keeping should be improved.

The people using the service at the time of the inspection were not able to tell us about their experience. We therefore used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. Using this, we saw that people experienced care and support from staff who understood their needs, although at times their privacy was not respected.

The inspection took place on 3 and 4 September 2015 and was unannounced. Our last inspection of this service took place in November 2013 when no breaches of legal requirements were identified.

Sandringham Road is a six-bedded care home for people with learning disabilities. It is located in the Doncaster suburb of Intake, close to public transport links and local facilities. Staff working within the home are employed by Rotherham, Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust. At the time of our visit there were six people living at the home.

The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our 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.

Some people we spoke with had limited verbal communication. However, they very clearly indicated they felt safe and were happy living in the home, liked the staff and did the activities they liked to do.

Staff we spoke with had a clear understanding of safeguarding people and they were confident their managers and the rest of the team would act appropriately to safeguard people from abuse.

The support plans we looked at included risk assessments, which identified any risk associated with people’s care and had been devised to help minimise and monitor the risks.

We saw that the control and prevention of infection was managed well and that staff had been trained in infection control.

We found there were enough staff with the right skills, knowledge and experience to meet people’s needs and the staff told us they received good training and support.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) sets out what must be done to make sure that the human rights of people who may lack mental capacity to make decisions are protected. MCA assessments and ‘best interests’ decisions had been made where there were doubts about a person’s capacity to make a specific decision. The registered manager had made DoLS applications to the local authority and we saw that staff explained and asked permission before providing any care to people.

People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. People were also supported to maintain good health, have access to healthcare services and received on going healthcare support. We looked at people’s records and found they had received support from healthcare professionals when required.

People supported to keep in contact with people who were important to them, such as their family members.

People and their close family members, were encouraged to make their views known about their care. An independent advocate had sometimes helped with this. An advocate is someone who speaks up on people’s behalf.

We saw staff were aware of people’s needs and the best ways to support them, whilst maintaining their independence. Staff had caring attitudes, treated people with respect and were mindful of their rights and dignity.

People had a chance to say what they thought about the service and the service learned from its mistakes, using comments, complaint and incidents as an opportunity for learning or improvement. The registered manager promoted a culture that was person centred. Person centred care puts people at the centre of the design and delivery of the services they use.

People didn’t have any complaints to tell us about and indicated they were happy living at Sandringham Road. Their relatives were very complimentary about the service and one healthcare professional we met during the inspection said, “I give this service my recommendation, it is very good.”