We inspected Schumey’s Corner on the 19 November 2018. The inspection was unannounced.

Schumey’s corner is a residential care home for up to two people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection two people were using the service. The service was divided into two living areas with one person using the upstairs and one person using the downstairs, so they were supported to life independently. The service was set in a residential area with easy access to the local community and had a large garden. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and 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.

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.

The care service has 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.

The service was safe. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. There were systems in place to minimise the risk of infection and to learn lessons from accidents and incidents. People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. People’s needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff. Medication was dispensed by staff who had received training to do so.

The service was effective. People were cared for and supported by staff who had received training to support people to meet their needs. The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. 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 were supported to eat and drink enough to ensure they maintained a balanced diet and referrals to other health professionals were made when required. The environment was well maintained and suitable for the needs of people.

The service was caring. Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner. Staff had a good understanding of people’s preferences for care. Staff always worked hard to promote people’s independence through encouraging and supporting people to make informed choices.

The service was responsive. People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis. People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities. The registered manager responded to complaints received in a timely manner.

The service was well-led. The service had systems in place to monitor and provide good care and these were reviewed on a regular basis.

The inspection took place on 7 March 2016 and was unannounced.

Schumey’s Corner is a small service providing intensive support for up to two people who have a learning disability and complex support needs. The service does not provide nursing care. At the time of our inspection there were two people using the service. The people live in a small detached house, each occupying one floor of the property. There is a shared entrance and garden but no other communal areas.

A registered manager was in post at the service. 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.

Staff knew how to keep people safe. Risks were well assessed and steps were taken to minimise potential risks. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. On-call arrangements worked well. There were systems in place to manage medicines and people were supported to take their prescribed medicines safely. The provider had a robust recruitment process in place to protect people from the risk of avoidable harm.

People were enabled to make their own decisions about their support and life-style. Staff followed processes in place to ensure decisions were made in people’s best interests, involving family and outside professionals as appropriate.

People were supported to purchase and prepare food and drink of their choice. People’s health needs were managed by staff with input from relevant health care professionals.

People received support that was personalised and tailored to their needs. They led full lives both in the service and in the local community.

People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect by staff who knew them well. People had confidence that the manager would investigate and address their concerns.

There was an open culture and the manager demonstrated effective leadership skills. Staff were enthusiastic about their work and they felt able to express their views. The provider had systems in place to check the quality of the service.

We gathered evidence of people’s experiences of the service by talking with people, observing how people spent their time and noting how they interacted with other people living in the home and with staff.

Some of the people using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. During our visit we spoke with some people who told us they were happy. We saw that people smiled and appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff and other people living in the home.

During our inspection on 01 August 2013, we were unable to talk to people who use the service because they were out in the community so we returned on 04 September 2013 to gain their perspective.

We observed that people were very happy talking with the staff who were on duty and staff listened when people made choices about what they wanted to do that day. One person we spoke with said they made lots of their own decisions, which included activities and visits outside the home and housework they undertook within the home. Guidance relating to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 had been followed to record people’s ability to make decisions about their lives.

Support plans gave staff enough guidance on the ways in which each person preferred to be supported. Assessments of risks to people were carried out so that people were supported to be independent and kept as safe as possible. Each person’s healthcare needs were met.

We found that staff continually sought people’s views and asked their opinions. We saw they worked in partnership with people and people lived very independent lives. We found that staff had a good understanding of how to best meet each person’s care needs.

Staff undertook a range of training so that they could meet the needs of those living in the home.