This inspection was unannounced and took place on 24 July 2017. Sandylee House is registered to provide accommodation for up to seven people. People who used the service had learning disabilities, and at the time of our inspection, six people were using the service. Our last inspection visit took place on 22 December 2015, and the service was rated as ‘Good.’ At this inspection visit, the service remained ‘Good.’

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. A service manager managed the service on a day-to-day basis.

At our previous inspection, we told the provider to make improvements to ensure that when people were not able to make certain decisions for themselves, they followed the legal guidance available. At this inspection, the required improvements had been made. People were assisted to make decisions, and when needed, the provider had shown why their support was in their best interests.

People continued to be safe living at Sandylee House. They were protected from harm by staff who understood how to promote their safety and manage any potential risks. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. There were effective systems in place to ensure staff were suitable to work with people. Medicines were managed safely, and people were protected from any risks associated with them.

Staff were equipped with the knowledge they needed to carry out their roles effectively, and received training to develop their skills. They supported people to maintain a balanced diet and ensure they had access to healthcare services. People were supported by staff who were caring and kind. Staff knew people well and promoted their independence. People were able to maintain relationships that were important to them.

The care that people received continued to be responsive to their individual needs, and this was delivered in a personalised manner. People contributed to the planning and review of their care in a meaningful way. They were involved in activities they enjoyed and were encouraged to make choices in their lives.

The service continued to be well led, and the management team encouraged a positive open culture at the home. People were involved in the development of the service and the provider listened to the feedback they received. There were effective systems in place to drive continuous improvement at the service.

We inspected this service on 22 December 2015. This was an unannounced inspection carried out by one inspector. Our last inspection took place on 19 July 2013 and at that time we found the provider was meeting the regulations we looked at.

The service was registered to provide accommodation for up to seven people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection six people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

When people were unable to consent, mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were not completed. The provider had not considered that some people were being restricted and that deprivation of liberty safeguards referrals were needed.

People were treated with dignity and respect and the staff were kind and caring. People were protected from the risks of abuse because staff understood where harm may be caused and took action when people were at risk of harm.

People were cared for by staff that had the knowledge and skills required to care and support them

The staffing was organised flexibly to enable people to be involved with activities and do the things they enjoyed.

People were supported to eat and drink the food they liked, a variety of food was offered and meal times were viewed as a social event.

People had access to health care and were supported to attend healthcare appointments when they needed it.

People and staff were encouraged and supported to provide feedback on the service. There were systems in place to review the quality of the service provided and the provider was committed to developing and improving the service.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

This inspection was unannounced which meant the provider and the staff did not know we were coming. Six people were in residence when we undertook our inspection. We spoke with three people living in the home, two staff and the registered manager.

People spoke well of the home, one person using the service said, “I can talk to whoever is on duty, I like the staff. I feel safe here because I don't worry about things.” Another person using the service said, “They treat me like royalty.” A staff member said, “I think it is absolutely wonderful here, you can feel the care that's going on. It is all about the people who live here, it is not about money, the ethos is fantastic.”

We saw the home could demonstrate how arrangements to seek people’s consent to care or treatment had been agreed in the person’s best interests.

We saw people were treated with care and compassion and the staff responded well to their needs or concerns.

We looked at the cleanliness and suitability of the environment to ensure people lived in a home where the décor and infection control standards were appropriate. We found the home was clean, safe and well maintained.

We found the service was well led because the registered provider supported the staff team and managed risks to the service effectively.

We carried out this visit as part of our schedule of inspections to check on the care and welfare of people using this service. The visit was unannounced, which meant the registered provider and the staff did not know we were coming. We spoke with four people using the service and four staff about how the service was delivered and the quality of service provision.

The routines and daily activities were flexible and staff responded to people’s needs. The staffing was provided to ensure people were able to carry out planned activities. People spoke positively about the staff and the support they received. Comments included “There’s always enough staff here. We get to go where we want to go.” And “I enjoy making cakes with staff and helping out. The staff help me to do the things I want to do.”

We saw that people were dressed in individual styles of dress that reflected their age, gender and the activities they were doing. People told us they went shopping and chose their clothes.

People said they were involved in making decisions about their care and their views were taken into account. People were involved in regular meetings about how the home was managed and could comment on things they liked or things they wanted to change.

Where people needed health support, this was discussed with each person and the care people needed was recorded. People told us they could decide if they wanted to be seen in private when receiving health care.

The home supported people to develop skills needed to live independently. People knew how to keep safe in the home and the community. People said they felt safe in the home and would talk to the staff if they were worried. People knew how to make a complaint, and told us they would be comfortable talking to staff about any concern.

Staffordshire Local Involvement Network (LINks) visited the home in May 2012. LINks are groups of individual members of the public and local voluntary and community groups who work together to improve health and social care services. They found that people had a real range of choices in relation to their activities, staff support and companions. They observed people were treated with dignity and respect and in an age-appropriate manner.