This inspection took place on the 21 May 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one inspector. The previous inspection to the service was in January 2016 and the service was rated 'Good' overall.

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.

1 Parkstone Avenue is a registered care home providing 24-hour care for eight adults with severe or profound learning disabilities and those with additional mobility or physical difficulties. The care home is a large, detached purpose-built bungalow in a residential road. Each person has a single room and there is a communal bathroom, shower room, kitchen, dining room and lounge. There is an -enclosed garden at the back of the house with level access. At the time of our inspection there were eight people using the service.

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. The recruitment process ensured that appropriate checks were carried out before staff commenced employment. There were sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people and keep them safe from potential harm or abuse. The service assessed people's health and wellbeing needs and carried out risk assessments to minimise risk to health. The registered manager and staff kept people's medication records up to date.

The service was effective. People were cared for and supported by staff who had received training to support people and 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 eat and drink enough to ensure they maintained a balanced diet and referrals to health and social care services were made when required.

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

The service was responsive. Records we viewed showed people and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care and was person centred. Support plans were reviewed on a regular basis and when there was a change in care needs. People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities. The service responded to complaints in a timely manner.

The service was well-led. Staff and people spoke very highly of the registered manager and provider who were supportive and worked hard to provide an exceptional service. The service had systems in place to monitor and provide good care and these were reviewed on a regular basis.

This inspection took place on the 5 and 6 January 2016 and was unannounced.

1 Parkstone Avenue provides accommodation and support for up to eight people who have a physical disability or learning disability. On the day of our inspection the service did not have any vacancies. 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. The registered manager ensured that staff had an understanding of people’s support needs and had the skills and knowledge to meet them.

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.

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.

Medicines were stored and administered in a safe way.

Systems were in place to gather people’s views. These included surveys, staff meetings and talking with relatives.

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.

When we visited 1 Parkstone Avenue we found that the care provided met people's healthcare and personal needs. Relatives we spoke with were very complimentary about the service. One person said, "The care here is excellent and there are no problems at all." Another said, "My relative enjoys the activities they run and I am always kept informed about any health issues."

Care plans that we viewed were very clear and informative and contained detailed information about each person's requirements. Relatives were involved in the planning of care of people using the service and they attended reviews of those plans with carers and key workers.

All staff had received safeguarding training and were aware of the signs of abuse and how to report such matters. Relatives told us that they thought the service was a safe place for their relative to live and had no concerns. They felt that staff were kind and caring.

When we looked at staffing levels and the training they received we found that there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified carers on duty at all times. There were systems in place to manage staff shortages. Relatives and staff we spoke with felt that the training met the needs of people using the service.

The home had a complaints policy that was clear and informative and relatives we spoke with were aware of how to make a complaint. This was also explained in the service users guide that each relative received.

Our observations showed that people who use the service are treated as individuals and with dignity and respect; and staff are committed in supporting people to lead a purposeful and meaningful life as possible. The provider has used creative methods to enable people to make decisions and choices about their lives, for example, use of multimedia methods such as DVD.

Support plans for individual people were noted to be person centred detailing their specific care needs and how these were to be met by staff. Suitable arrangements are in place to ensure that people who use the service are involved in meaningful daytime and social activities of their choice and according to their individual needs and interests. Records showed that people receive effective healthcare support. The atmosphere within the service is calm and relaxed and people where possible indicated that they liked living at Parkstone Avenue.

The service has sufficient staff available at all times to support individuals. From review of records and following discussions with staff, the provider is proactive in providing staff with suitable training, supervision and appraisal opportunities. It was evident during the inspection that the roles and responsibilities of staff are clearly defined, morale is high and there is good team work.

Where people were unable to provide a verbal response or tell us verbally their experiences, as a result of their limited verbal communication, we noted their non verbal cues and watched the care and support provided by staff.

We found that people were relaxed and comfortable. People told us they liked the staff in the home. They also told us that they liked the meals provided and were given appropriate choices and alternatives.

The results from the organisation’s and service’s quality assurance surveys told us that people who use the service and their representatives are very satisfied with the care and support provided at the home.