The inspection took place on the 15 August 2016 and was unannounced.

Scremby Grange is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to19 people who have a learning disability or autism. The home supports people with complex needs and who need extra space and care to be able to fulfil their potential. There was a main house and eight individual bungalows. There were 17 people living at the home on the day of our inspection.

There was a registered manager for the home. 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 home is run.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor how a provider applies the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. DoLS are in place to protect people where they do not have capacity to make decisions and where it is considered necessary to restrict their freedom in some way. This is usually to protect themselves. People’s abilities to make decisions were assessed and where necessary DoLS authorisations were in place.

The registered manager monitored the staffing levels to ensure there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. They were responsive to people’s needs and increased staffing levels when they identified people needed further support. Appropriate checks were completed before staff were employed at the home. Staff were supported to provide safe effective care for people with a thorough induction and on-going training. Regular supervisions supported staff to raise concerns and to receive individual support to improve their care skills. Annual appraisals were in place to support staff to develop their careers.

Staff were knowledgeable about the different types of abuse people might face and were clear on the steps they would need to take to keep people safe. Where people might need to be restrained for their own safety this was clearly recorded in their care plan and all incidents of restraint were reviewed. People’s medicines were safely managed and available to them when needed.

Staff were kind and caring and had taken the time to get to know people. Where people had special communication needs staff had developed the skills needed to communicate so people could voice their opinions and interact with staff. People were encouraged and enabled to maintain their relationships with friends and family.

People’s care was planned with them and their family's involvement and was personalised to meet their individual needs. Risks people faced were identified and action was taken to reduce the risk and keep people safe. Staff had an in depth knowledge of people’s needs and used this to provide person centred care which help people to be happy. People were supported to be busy and to take place in a wide variety of activities in the home, in the local community and when on holiday. Some people had worked with the provider’s employment services and spent some of their time working.

People were encouraged to be involved with running the home and attended meetings to discuss activities they would like to attend and to discuss the meals they would like to see on the menu. The provider gathered the views of people living at the home and their family’s views and used this to identity areas where they could improve the experience for people.

The home was well led and people living at the home, relatives and staff were able to approach the manager with any concerns and were confident that any complaints would be dealt with. The provider had ensured that there were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of care people received and their environment.

We spoke with five people who use the service, one relative and three members of staff. One person told us, “I like the staff, they talk to me well. I get help from staff at home with cooking and washing up.”

Another person commented, “I like living here, get on well with staff. I have three days per week at college, where I do a catering course.”

We observed throughout the day of the inspection that support staff communicated with people in a kind and considerate manner offering choices in their care and activity.

Drinks and snacks were available to people in between meal times. We saw staff who were working on paperwork or office based tasks stopped what they were doing and prioritised being with anyone who wanted to talk or needed help.

A parent who attended a review commented, “They listen to parents”, and told us that they regularly took their son out with his brother, who also had a learning disability to maintain the family contact.

A member of staff commented that there were, “Lots of positives for the home to go forward.” and added that, “Support is really good, the manager helps out and is a good role model.”

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a registered manager on our register at the time.

During our visit we spoke with seven people who used the service, the manager and two care workers.

A person using the service told us they felt listened to and involved in their care. They also told us staff were polite, respected their privacy and treated them with respect. We observed positive interactions between staff and people using the service. People were given a choice in respect of the activities they wished to take part in and had a busy schedule of activities.

People using the service looked well cared for, were relaxed and showed signs of wellbeing. People we spoke with told us they felt safe living at the home. They also confirmed they felt they would be able to talk to staff if there was anything worrying them.

People described living at the home as, “Alright, very nice” and “Good, I like living here with the others.” One person told us that they were hoping to move out to a flat as they wanted to be more independent.

During the visit we spoke with relatives who confirmed their satisfaction with all aspects of the service. They told us, “We had to fight to get the funding for our relative to come here and it was the best move we made. He has become so much more independent and a very confident young man.”