This inspection took place on 20 December 2017 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 15 December 2015 the service was found to be meeting the required standards in the areas we looked at.

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.

Walsingham Support - 39 Adeyfield Road is a care home for up to six people who may have a learning disability, sensory impairment or autistic spectrum disorder. There were six people living at the home at the time of this inspection.

The home consisted of one large detached house spread over two floors. Each person has their own personalised bedroom with shared bathrooms/shower facilities, In addition to its six bedrooms; the spacious property has two bathrooms, a shower room, kitchen, lounge, dining room and laundry room. The registered manager’s office is located in a separate building in front of the main building. The home is conveniently located about 10 minutes away from the town centre.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 felt safe living in the home and staff received appropriate training in how to keep people safe.

Staff received training and appropriate support from the managers to carry out their roles effectively.

People`s medicines were managed safely by staff who had their competencies assessed.

There were policies and procedures in place to protect people from the risk of infections and staff adhered to these.

There were enough staff employed through robust procedures to meet people`s needs effectively.

People were involved in planning their care and support, signed their own care plans and consented to the support they received.

People were involved in daily tasks around the home like cleaning, laundry, cooking and baking. Staff supported people to access the community and follow their interests.

People told us they enjoyed the food and people’s choice was sought by staff daily.

People`s feedback about the service they received was regularly sought and they felt they could voice their opinions in one to one conversations they had with their key worker.

People and staff were positive about the management of the service. There were systems in place to ensure the quality of the service was monitored and improved where required.

The inspection took place on 15 December 2015 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 27 September 2013, the service was found to be meeting the required standards in the areas we looked at. Walsingham Support 39 Adeyfield Road is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 6 people who may have a learning disability, sensory impairment or autistic spectrum disorder At the time of our inspection there were 6 people living at the home.

There was a manager in post who had registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that as far as possible people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. The application procedures for this in care homes and hospitals are called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the provider worked within the principles of the MCA and whether any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty were being met. At the time of the inspection we found that DoLS applications had been submitted in line with MCA requirements for everybody who lived at the home in order to keep them safe from harm.

People confirmed they felt safe, happy and well looked after at the home. Staff had received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and knew how to report concerns, both internally and externally. Safe and effective recruitment practices were followed to ensure that all staff were suitably qualified and experienced. Arrangements were in place to ensure there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff available at all times to meet people’s individual needs.

Plans and guidance had been drawn up to help staff deal with unforeseen events and emergencies. The environment and equipment used were regularly checked and well maintained to keep people safe. Trained staff helped people to take their medicines safely and at the right time. Identified and potential risks to people’s health and well-being were reviewed and managed effectively.

Relatives were positive about the skills, experience and abilities of staff who worked at the home. They received training and refresher updates relevant to their roles and had regular supervision meetings to discuss and review their development and performance.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health and social care professionals when necessary. They were provided with a healthy balanced diet that met their individual needs.

Staff made considerable efforts to ascertain people’s wishes and obtain their consent before providing personal care and support, which they did in a kind and compassionate way. Information about local advocacy services was available to help people and their family’s access independent advice or guidance.

Staff had developed positive and caring relationships with the people they cared for and clearly knew them very well. People were involved in the planning, delivery and reviews of their care and support.. Confidentiality of information held about their medical and personal histories was securely maintained throughout the home.

Care was provided in a way that promoted people’s dignity and respected their privacy. People received perso

On the date of the inspection the people present who used the service were unable to respond to specific questions about their experiences as they had complex needs. However, they spoke with us about random topics and appeared to be happy and content.

We found that the provider had systems in place to ensure people's care records were up to date and person centred. The provider was taking reasonable steps to protect people from the risk of abuse. The provider was taking reasonable steps to ensure CQC was sent notifications as required. There were processes in place to minimise the risk of unauthorised access to the records of staff and people who used the service. We noted that the provider had implemented robust recruitment procedures.

On the day of our visit most of the people who use the service were out engaging in activities in the community. The people who were at home had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences.

The provider had appropriate systems in place to ensure medications were managed safely. We also found that staff had sufficient support and training to ensure they were able to perform their role. The service had robust systems in place to ensure the correct number of staff worked each shift to meet the needs of people who used the service.

We found care plans and risk assessments reflected individual needs of people and were frequently reviewed to ensure they were current. There were policies and procedures for staff to follow in order to minimise the risk of inappropriate treatment. Complaints were appropriately recorded and investigated.