St Saviour’s is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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 who used the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

St Saviour’s provided accommodation and personal care for up to four people who have learning disabilities and some associated physical and/or sensory disabilities. Three people used the service at the time of inspection. The building was situated over two floors, with people's bedrooms located upstairs. Some people had their own bathrooms attached to their bedrooms and there were communal facilities for those that did not. There was a kitchen, dining-room, large lounge and conservatory for people to relax in. People also had access to a large garden area at the back of the property, with decking and views of the sea.

At our last inspection in March 2017, the service was rated ‘Good’ overall. We re-inspected as the service had a change of provider. During this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

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.

People were safe. Risk assessments were completed that enabled them to do the activities they chose and ensured staff were aware of all the support people needed to keep them safe. Staff were recruited safely and people were part of the process. There were suitable numbers of staff to meet the needs of people and sufficient contingency plans to cover any staff absences. People received their medicines safely from trained staff. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored with action taken that reduced reoccurrence. The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of how to recognise potential signs of abuse and knowledge of risks to people.

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 practise.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to support people and meet all their needs. They spoke highly of their induction and the guidance they received to get to know the people they supported, their routines and preferences. Further support was provided in supervisions, appraisals and team meetings.

People’s nutritional needs were met and they were given choice and control over what they wanted to eat and drink. When dietary concerns were identified, staff took action to minimise risks whilst people’s wishes were listened to and considered. Records showed that advice was regularly sought from health and social care professionals, particularly when people’s needs changed. This had included alternative therapies that had a positive impact on people.

Everyone we spoke to felt that staff were kind, caring and genuinely enjoyed working with people. People's dignity, independence and privacy was promoted. Staff knew people, their preferences and support needs well. They were proud of people’s achievements and encouraged them to build and learn new skills.

Care plans were tailored to individual needs and highlighted areas where additional support was required. People had their own key-worker; this was a named member of staff who had a central role in their lives and would oversee their support needs and care plans. S