Stadon Road is a ‘care home’ for up to seven people with disabilities. There were seven people living in the home when we visited. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

At our last inspection on 30 June 2016 we rated the service as ‘Good’ in all areas. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support a 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.

There was not a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. There was however an acting registered manager in post, who was proceeding with an application to register with CQC at the time of our visit. 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 cared for safely. Staff had a good understanding of abuse and the safeguarding procedures to report any incidents of concern. Risk assessments were in place to manage potential risks within people’s lives, whilst also promoting their independence. Medicines were administered safely.

The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service. Good staffing levels were in place.

Staff were well trained and supported to maintain effective care for people. Staff were all positive about the management in place, and were happy with the support they received.

Staff had developed caring and understanding relationships with the people they supported and knew their routines and preferences well. People’s independence was respected and promoted where possible and staff enjoyed working with people.

People's consent was gained before any care was provided. 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 involved in their own care planning and were able to contribute to the way in which they were supported. A process was in place which ensured people could raise any complaints or concerns, which were acted upon promptly.

People participated in activities, hobbies and events that they enjoyed. Information around the home was in an accessible format to help people understand information and make choices.

Audits and quality checks had been completed and had consistently identified where improvements were needed. Risks were known by staff and were mitigated against. Care records were up to date and person centred.

We carried out our inspection on 30 June 2016. The inspection was unannounced.

The service provided accommodation for up to six people living with physical or neurological disabilities. There were six people using the service at the time of our 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.

People who used the service were safe. Their premises and equipment were well maintained. They understood the importance of their own safety and knew how to report any concerns they may have in this regards. Staff also knew how to respond to any concerns about people’s safety and welfare.

There were enough staff on duty to keep people safe and meet their individual needs. The provider had a safe recruitment process to ensure that they employed staff who had the right skills and experience, and as far as possible were suited to supporting the people who use the service.

People received their medicines as prescribed. The provider had relevant protocols for the safe management of people’s medicines.

Staff had the relevant skills they required to meet people’s needs. They had access to effective induction and training that equipped them with the skills they required to look after people. They had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. They supported people in accordance with the relevant legislation and guidance.

People had access to a variety of nutritionally balanced meals. Staff provided the support people required to have timely access to health care services when they needed to.

Staff supported people in a kind and compassionate manner. They treated people with dignity and respect. They were knowledgeable about the needs of the people they supported and ensured that people were involved in decisions about their care.

People’s care plans reflected their individual needs and preferences. Their care was provided in a person centred manner. They had access to social activities of their choice, and opportunities to be part of their local community. The provider listened to feedback from people using the service and their relatives. People told us that staff acted promptly on their feedback.

The service had strong leadership. There was a shared ethos of providing person-centred care. The registered manager supported staff to meet the standards she expected of them which enabled them to deliver a good standard of care. The provider had effective procedures for monitoring and assessing the quality of service that people received. The registered manager listened to people’s feedback and use it to improve the quality of the service.

We spoke with three people who received support at the time of the inspection. They all said that they were satisfied with the care they received from staff.

A person told us; ‘’staff are lovely. No one has a problem with the way they do their jobs. It's more like a family here‘’.

We spoke with three relatives. Everyone told us that the care staff provided was of a very high standard.

One relative said; ‘‘it’s a marvellous service. If I had to go into residential care I would love to go into a home like this that looks after people so well’’.

This was a positive inspection. People living in the home and their relatives were satisfied with the care that staff supplied. Management systems had been in place to deliver care that met people's needs. The essential standards we inspected were met. One person told us she wanted to go out more. She then told the manager about this, who said that this would be arranged.

We spoke with three people living in the home at the time of the inspection. Due to communication difficulties, we briefly talked with two other people. People all said that they were either very or mainly satisfied with the care that they received.

A person told us that staff were ‘’fantastic. There has never been a problem with the help they give me‘’.

We spoke with two relatives. They all told us that the care that staff provided was very good. One relative said: ‘’Staff are absolutely wonderful. They couldn’t be nicer people’’.

This was largely a positive inspection. People living in the home stated that they were generally very satisfied with the care they were given. Their next of kin highly praised the service. The main issues identified were to ensure that there were always enough staff on duty to meet people's needs, and ensure complaints were always recorded and acted on.

We spoke with three people who used services and they told us they were very happy and had confidence in the staff and manager at the home. People were routinely involved in the planning and delivery of their care. We saw in people’s care plans they were asked monthly for feedback to improve their care. One person had asked to go out more often and this has been arranged. People told us the residents-get-together meetings were important to them and provided an opportunity to gather feedback and improve the service.

People told us “We are a close knit family here.” “We are treated as individuals. People know our likes and dislikes.”