Vibrance -138-138a Mason way 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 care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service is registered to provide personal care for up to ten adults with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection six people were using the service.

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 on-going 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 were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs. We did note that staff had been reduced on some days due to vacancies in the service. This reduction in staff did not match what was recorded in the tenant’s guide. Staff told us they were meeting people’s needs but felt they could deliver a more responsive service with additional staffing.

Staff understood how to protect people from harm and their responsibilities to raise concerns and record safety incidents. The service managed risks to people to reduce potential hazards. Where people required support to take their medicines, this was provided in a safe way. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to hygiene and infection control.

People shopped for their own food and created their own menus. The service provided staff with training to ensure they had the skills to support people effectively, in line with current best practice. When needed people received support from health professionals in a timely manner. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People continued to receive support that was responsive to their individual needs. People were consulted regarding their preferences and interests and these were incorporated into their support plan to ensure they were supported to lead the life they wanted to. Staff supported people to be as independent as possible. The support people received was reviewed with them to ensure it remained relevant. People knew how to raise any concerns or complaints, and these were responded to in a timely manner.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager. Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality of service being delivered and the running of the home. We did find that some records whilst still being reflective of people's needs required reviewing.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

This inspection took place on 14 January 2016 and was unannounced. We had previously visited the service in October 2013 and found it to be compliant with the then legislation.

Vibrance at Mason Way are two separate houses on an ordinary housing estate that can accommodate up to eight people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. There were currently seven people using the service and the service had recently applied to increase their numbers to accommodate 10 people. We are processing this application.

The service had a registered manager who had been in post for several years and knew the people and service well. 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.

We found a good all round service that understood the needs of people that they supported. The vision and values of what the service wanted to achieve was widely understood and practiced by people. People at this service were valued members of their community and had ordinary life experiences that were fulfilling and appropriately supportive to allow people choice and independence.

People were kept safe, but allowed to take measured risk. There was a cohesive staff team that were well supported and had the correct skills to support and empower people. Medicine was well managed with actions taken when needed to keep people as safe as they could be.

Staff showed that they cared for people. Privacy and dignity was respected. People were involved with their care planning and determining their lifestyle. People had individualised care and support that allowed them to lead a meaningful life.

The management team were effective in supporting this service. People at the service were involved with the running and decision making at different levels. Quality was monitored and actions taken to learn from events and improve the service for people.

On the day of our visit, staff were supporting people to access activities outside of the home environment. We spoke with three people who lived in the home who told us they enjoyed living there and that they had the opportunity to choose their activities and how they spent their time. People had access to a range of activities to meet their needs and were also supported to pursue their hobbies and interests such as horse riding, attending college, shopping and dog walking. One person said, “I really like my room and I have nice friends here.” Another said, “I am very happy here. All the staff make us laugh.”

We found that staff were respectful of people's right to make their own decisions and give consent to care and treatment. Appropriate support was given when required.

People took it in turns to shop and cook for everyone living in the house. Support was given by the care workers according to individual needs and to ensure everyone’s diet was nutritious.

The accommodation comprised of two separate houses that shared some communal areas such as the garden. Both houses were clean and bright and had their own individual character according to the particular preferences of the people who lived there.

Records viewed and discussions with staff confirmed that the staff were skilled and experienced to meet people’s needs.

Some of the people living at 138/138a Mason Way were not available to meet with us during our visit as they were out in the community and some chose not to talk with us. They shared their views through gestures, facial expressions and body language wherever possible. We saw people were relaxed and comfortable with staff and other people using the service.

Some people spoke with us generally about the things they enjoyed at 138/138a Mason Way. They told us about the things they liked to do and holidays and days out they had enjoyed.