Well Royd House is a residential care home in Halifax. The home provides accommodation and personal care for people with learning disabilities. At the time of inspection there was 10 people living at Well Royd House.

People’s experience of using this service:

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways. There was a strong focus on promoting choice, control and independence. People’s support focused on taking positive risks to ensure they had as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become independent.

People received good care and support which met their individual needs. A relative told us, “[name of person] is very well looked after and has become more independent through accessing opportunities in the community.”

People and relatives praised the home and the way in which care was provided.

People were supported in a safe environment. Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and mitigated. The service learnt lessons and improved the safety of the service following incidents.

There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received their required care and support. Staff were kind and caring and treated people well. Staff knew people well and had developed good, caring relationships with them.

Staff had received bespoke training to enable them to care for the individuals living within the home.

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.

The service was well managed. The acting manager had a clear focus and continued to work alongside staff. Staff told us they felt the acting manager was working with them to ensure the home was maintained and were looking to continuously improve the service. We spoke to the acting manager about ensuring peoples (PRN) records evidenced how staff would know if a person was in pain. This information was completed and sent to us after the inspection.

Rating at last inspection: Good (August 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

This was an unannounced inspection which we carried out on 10 August 2016.

We last inspected Well Royd House in August 2014. At that inspection we found the service was meeting all of the legal requirements in force at the time.

Well Royd House is a care home that provides accommodation and personal care for up to 12 people with learning disabilities. 12 people were living at the home at the time of inspection. Nursing care is not provided.

A manager was in post who had applied to be registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.’

Staff said the management team were supportive and approachable. The manager monitored the quality of the service provided and introduced improvements to ensure that people received safe care that met their needs.

People told us they felt safe. Robust vetting procedures were in place when new staff were recruited. People were relaxed and appeared comfortable with the staff who supported them. Staff had received training and had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Best Interest Decision Making, when people were unable to make decisions for themselves. We have made a recommendation for staff to receive other training to meet any specialist needs of people.

Staff knew the people they were supporting well. Care was provided with patience and kindness and people's privacy and dignity were respected. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and people were involved in making decisions about their care. People were supported to maintain some control in their lives. They were given information in a format that helped them to understand if they did not read to encourage their involvement in every day decision making.

People told us they were supported to go on holiday and to be part of the local community. They were provided with opportunities to follow their interests and hobbies and they were introduced to new activities. People had food and drink to meet their needs. Some people were assisted by staff to cook their own food. Other people received meals that had been cooked by staff. People had access to health care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment. People received their medicines in a safe and timely way.

The premises were mostly well maintained but some floor coverings were showing signs of wear and tear and we have made a recommendation about this.

The people living at Well Royd House required varying levels of assistance to express their views about the quality of the service. People we spoke with were happy with the staff and the service. They said that the home "is a nice place."

We found that the people who used the service were involved in their care planning and

received personalised care and support.

The care plans we looked at included detailed information on how people's needs were met by staff and other health care providers and services.

Staff told us some people who lived at the home enjoyed their independence and often went out shopping or travelled into town. We saw that staff were very supportive and took time to explain things in a way that promoted people's dignity and ensured people's independence was maximised.

Staff we spoke with were happy to work for the service and told us that they "Would recommend to others to work here", "I'm happy here" and that "We are a good team". We saw evidence that the provider operated an effective recruitment process to ensure that only suitably qualified, skilled and experienced people were employed at the service.

We also found that there was a system in place to respond appropriately if people had any complaints.

We looked around the premises and found it was clean and welcoming. People's bedroom's were individualised with their personal items and people could choose where to spend their time. We observed support staff were friendly towards people and enabled them to be as independent as possible, i.e. making their own drinks and lunch.

One person told us about the arrangements the home had put in place to celebrate Valetines Day. Another person we spoke with told us they were happy with the support they received and were aware why certain restrictions when going out had been put in place.

The staff we spoke with felt people received good care which was provided by a qualified team. They were complimentary of the Registered Manager, felt supported and felt they could discuss any concerns with them and they would be acted upon.

People thinking about moving into the home are invited to visit and see if the service is right for them. The views of other people already living there are always taken into account when anyone new is considering taking up residence.

We saw evidence of people being involved in decisions about their care and support, people know about their care plans and review meetings and we could see that relatives and other people who are important in people’s lives are involved in decision making.

We saw people being consulted about what they wanted to do and being treated with respect at all times during our visit.

Health care needs are well documented and people are always supported to attend appointments.

The accommodation is of a good standard, well maintained, well decorated and very comfortable. People told us they were very happy with their home. They liked their rooms and they were very satisfied with the communal areas. They said the refurbishment of the property was “great” and “they made a real good job of it “.

Staffing arrangements are organised to meet people’s needs. People told us there are always staff around when they are needed; they told us they liked the staff and found them easy to talk to. From our observations we could see that people get on well with the staff.

People thinking about moving into the home are invited to visit and see if the service is right for them. The views of other people already living there are always taken into account when anyone new is considering taking up residence.

We saw evidence of people being involved in decisions about their care and support, people know about their care plans and review meetings and we could see that relatives and other people who are important in people’s lives are involved in decision making.

We saw people being consulted about what they wanted to do and being treated with respect at all times during our visit.

Health care needs are well documented and people are always supported to attend appointments.

The accommodation is of a good standard, well maintained, well decorated and very comfortable. People told us they were very happy with their home. They liked their rooms and they were very satisfied with the communal areas. They said the refurbishment of the property was “great” and “they made a real good job of it “.

Staffing arrangements are organised to meet people’s needs. People told us there are always staff around when they are needed; they told us they liked the staff and found them easy to talk to. From our observations we could see that people get on well with the staff.

During our inspection we looked for the answers to five questions;

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, their relatives, staff supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe in the home. We found safeguarding procedures to be robust and staff could tell us how they safeguarded people they supported. The manager set the staff rota taking into consideration care needs when making decisions about numbers and qualifications.

The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We spoke with the manager who told us they were aware how to make a referral and to understand the reason for it.

Is the service effective?

Peoples’ health care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in the writing of their care plans. Specialist equipment such as assistive technology was used to help people to become aware of dangers. Their care plans provided details of how staff should use this effectively.

Is the service caring?

We saw people were supported by kind, attentive staff. We observed staff showed patience and offered encouragement when supporting people. People told us they liked the staff and had a good relationship with them. People using the service had the option of filling in a satisfaction survey however people told us if they did not like something they would tell the staff directly.

People’s preferences, likes, dislikes and aspirations had been recorded so that support could be provided in a way that respected peoples wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People completed a range of activities in and outside of the home on a regular basis. People made use of local transport to keep them involved in their local community.

People told us they knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. People said although they had not had to complain, they felt all concerns would be taken seriously.

Is the service well-led?

We found the service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care and support in a joined up way.

The home had a quality assurance system in place, records seen by us showed shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result, the quality of the service was continuingly improving.