About the service:

Wey View is a residential service that provides support to people with learning disabilities, autism and mental health conditions. They provide intensive support to people with complex needs. The service is registered to provide support to up to ten people, there were five people living at the service at the time of our visit.

People’s experience of using this service:

The outcomes for people using the service were not consistently reflecting the principles and values of Registering the Right Support as one person had had restrictions applied to them, limiting their choice, control and involvement without proper legal processes being followed.

Risks to people were not always managed safely. We identified instances where records relating to risk were not clear and measures to manage risk were not robust. We also identified the person's assessment did not gather enough information about their needs. The providers systems to monitor and audit care delivery had not proactively identified and addressed the breaches of the legal requirements found on this inspection.

People received a thorough assessment before coming to live at the service but we identified one example where this could have been more robust. People had detailed care plans and we saw evidence of systems to regularly involve people in their care. People’s healthcare needs were met and we saw records to show staff supported people to understand their health. People’s care plans had input from healthcare professionals and staff ensured people’s health was regularly checked. Staff were caring and committed to providing good care to the people they supported. People had individualised activity timetables which included leisure activities as well as activities to develop their skills and independence.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and staff had received training for their roles. Staff told us they felt supported by management and there was an open door policy. There was a new registered manager in post who was implementing improvements at the time of our visit and we saw evidence that they had started to implement improvements in response to our findings after the inspection.

Rating at last inspection: Good

Why we inspected: We were made aware of incidents at the service that showed there may be increased risk so we brought the inspection forward.

Follow up: We will request an action plan from the provider and continue to monitor the service closely. We will return to the service to re-inspect in line with our policy.

Wey View is a residential care home for upto 10 people with learning disabilities, physical disabilities and mental health conditions. Care is provided within one adapted building, with two annexes. At the time of our first visit, there were seven people living at the home.

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.

At this inspection we found the service Good.

Why the service is rated Good

People benefitted from a proactive approach to risk management and staff responded appropriately to incidents. Where there had been some recent concerns about staff culture, the provider had learned from these and identified plans to resolve them. People’s medicines were managed safely and the home was clean, reducing the risk of the spread of infection. There were enough staff working at the home to keep people safe and the provider carried out appropriate checks on new staff to ensure that they were suitable for their roles.

The food on offer matched people’s preferences and dietary needs. 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’s had access to healthcare professionals and the home environment was adapted to ensure it met people’s needs. Staff had received appropriate training and support for their roles.

People were supported by caring staff that they got on well with. Staff took time to involve people in their care and care was planned in a way that encouraged people to be independent. Staff were respectful of people’s privacy and dignity when providing support to them.

Care was planned in a person-centred way and staff knew what was important to people. People had access to a range of activities that were personalised to their needs and interests. Care plans were regularly reviewed and any changes were actioned by staff. There was a complaints procedure in place that was accessible to people and complaints were investigated and responded to appropriately.

People interacted well with the registered manager and staff had regular meetings to contribute to the running of the service. Regular checks and audits were carried out to identify improvements to people’s care. People were regularly involved in the running of the home through meetings and surveys. Where appropriate, the provider had notified CQC of significant events in line with their statutory duty to.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 14 September 2016. A breach of one legal requirement was found, in that not all staff had the training required to offer effective care. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the legal requirement in relation to the breach.

We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the key area of effective care as that was the area that required improvement. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Wey View on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Improvements to staff training had been implemented and staff had access to training that was tailored to people’s needs. Staff completed mandatory training as well as an induction so that they were effective in their roles. Staff received regular supervision and told us that they felt supported by management.

People’s rights were protected because staff worked in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Where decisions were being made on people’s behalf, assessments were carried out. Best interest decisions involved relatives and healthcare professionals. Where people were deprived of their liberty, the correct legal process was followed.

People’s nutritional needs were met. People were prepared meals in line with their dietary requirements and preferences. People had access to healthcare professionals. Staff worked alongside healthcare professionals to meet people’s needs.

This inspection took place on 14 September 2016 and was unannounced.

Wey View is a home providing support to up to 10 people living with learning disabilities, autism, complex needs and mental health problems. At the time of our inspection there were four people living at the home.

There was no registered manager in post, the current manager was in the process of being registered. 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 training was not always tailored to the individual needs of people who live at the home. In one instance staff did not feel equipped to deal with one person’s very complex behavioural needs. This meant that the person’s behaviour impacted on other people living at the home and meant that staff did not always feel confident in supporting this person.

The lack of additional training for staff supporting people with complex needs was a breach of Regulation 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

The home environment was not homely due to the need to create a safe space for one person living at the home. This affected other people and created an atmosphere in the home that was not inclusive of all people who lived there. However this was due to a temporary situation that was being resolved.

Staff told us that they received a thorough induction. People and relatives told us that staff were effective in their roles.

Staff understood their role in safeguarding people. They had received training and demonstrated a good understanding of how they would protect people from abuse of potential harm. Staff routinely carried out risk assessments and created plans to minimise known hazards whilst encouraging people’s independence.

Policies and procedures were in place to keep people safe in the event of emergencies. People had individual plans to keep them safe in the event of an emergency. Staff were trained in how to respond in the event of a fire and contingency plans were in place to keep people safe.

The manager had a system in place to ensure appropriate numbers of staff were working to meet the needs of people. Checks were undertaken to ensure staff were suitable for their roles.

People were administered their prescribed medicines by staff who had received medicines training. Medicines records were up to date to ensure medicines were administered safely.

Staff provided care in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Records demonstrated that people’s rights were protected as staff acted in accordance with the MCA when being supported to make specific decisions.

Staff followed the guidance of healthcare professionals where appropriate and we saw evidence of staff working alongside healthcare professionals to achieve outcomes for people.

People were supported to eat in line with their preferences and dietary requirements. People were involved in choosing meals and preparing food. Records contained details of people’s dietary requirements and preferences.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect. All caring interactions that we observed were positive and staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to respect people’s dignity.

Information in care plans reflected the needs and personalities of people. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and backgrounds as detailed in their care plans. People had choice about activities they wished to do and staff encouraged people to pursue new interests.

The manager had systems in place to monitor and ensure quality at the service.

Staff told us that they were well supported by management and had regular supervision.

People and relatives told us that they had a positive relationship with the manager.

During