The inspection took place on 3 May 2018 and was unannounced.

Timber Grove 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.

Timber Grove accommodates up to 15 people in an adapted single storey building who may have a physical disability, learning disability or sensory impairment. The service does not provide nursing care. On the day of our inspection, 11 people were living at Timber Grove.

At our last inspection on the 4 and 8 February 2016, we rated the service Good. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the overall rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service embraces 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 requires and did have 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.

There were adequate numbers of staff to help keep people safe, meet their needs and protect them from harm and abuse. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were appropriately assessed, managed and reviewed. There were safe systems in place for receiving, administering and disposing of medicines.

People were supported by staff that had the skills and experience needed to provide effective care. Staff had an understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). 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 and maintain a balanced diet and to access health and social care services when required.

People were cared for by staff who knew people well and were kind and sensitive to their needs. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity was respected and maintained at all times, and their independence promoted.

There was a strong emphasis on person centred care. Care plans were regularly reviewed and, where able, people were proactively supported to plan their care and support to ensure they received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. People were encouraged and supported by staff to pursue their interests and hobbies and activities were tailored around people’s likes, choices and abilities.

The registered manager demonstrated their commitment to learn and implement best practice, ensuring people had a good quality of life. Staff were motivated and proud to work at the service. Effective systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. The registered manager was able to demonstrate how they measured and analysed the care and support provided to people, and how this ensured that the service was operating safely and was continually improving to meet people’s needs.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This inspection took place on the 4 and 8 February 2016 and was unannounced.

Timber Grove provides accommodation and support for up to 15 people who have a physical disability, learning disability or sensory impairment. There were 11 people living at the service when we inspected. The home does not provide nursing care.

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.

The service provided good care and support to people enabling them to live fulfilled and meaningful lives. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect by staff who knew them well. Staff were caring and responsive. Care plans were person centred and were reviewed regularly.

People were cared for by staff that had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been made. There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet the needs of people. People were protected against potential abuse as staff had received training and understood their responsibilities to keep people safe. Medicines were stored and administered in a safe way.

We found there were policies in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff were aware of what these meant and the implications for people living at the service. Where people had been deprived of their liberty, applications had been submitted to the local authority for a DoLS authorisation.

There were quality assurance systems in place which assessed and monitored the quality of the service. These included audits on medication management, incidents and accidents and health and safety.

On the day of our inspection we found the main house to have a pleasant and friendly atmosphere.

Some of the people we met during this inspection had complex needs and were unable to tell us verbally about their experiences. Due to this we mainly used observation to help us understand their experience of the service they received.

We saw that staff were aware of individual needs and wishes. People were able to be involved in activities or not as they chose.

People told us that they enjoyed living here. We saw that staff always acknowledged people and if they were not available to spend time with that person they explained why they were not available at that point and when they would be.

We saw that there were some areas of maintenance required to the property but there was a schedule of works to address this. We saw that although people's records were kept in lockable storage, it was not locked, however this was remedied as soon as we identified it. Overall all records were kept appropriately..

We found that staff had received the appropriate checks prior to commencing employment, and induction was given prior to them being allowed to work alone. This meant that people were cared for by staff who were appropriately qualified and fit to do their job.

We were unable to talk to the people who use this service because they have difficulties with verbal and non verbal communication especially with people they are not used to.

However we gathered evidence about the experience of the people using this service by looking at the records kept by the service, reviewing the records of care kept at the service and by observing the care being provided to the people using the service on the day of our visit.