This inspection took place on 12 October 2018 and was unannounced. Woodcroft is a residential care home that provides accommodation and nursing care for up to six people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection six people were living and receiving support at the 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 the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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.

At our last inspection of the service on 10 March 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good. The service demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.

People continued to be supported and protected from the risk of abuse or harm. Risks to people’s safety and well-being were assessed and care plans were put into place to manage identified risks whilst ensuring individual’s independence and rights were respected. Accidents and incidents were recorded, managed and monitored safely to assist in reducing the risk of reoccurrence. There were systems in place to deal with emergencies and protect people from the risk of infections. Medicines were stored, managed and administered safely. There were sufficient numbers of staff to ensure people were supported appropriately and promptly when required. Appropriate recruitment checks were conducted before staff started work to ensure they were suitable to be employed in a social care environment.

Staff received an induction when they started work and had on-going support, supervision and training. 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 were supported to meet their nutrition and hydration needs and had access to health and social care professionals when required. People told us they were consulted about their care and staff treated them with kindness and respect. Care plans and assessments considered the support people required with regard to any protected characteristics they had under the Equality Act 2010. People were involved in day to day decisions about their care and treatment.

People indicated that staff were kind and caring and treated them with respect and dignity. People were involved in making decisions about their care. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the contents of people’s care plans and care plans contained clear guidance for staff on how best to support people to meet their needs and aims. People were supported to participate in activities that were meaningful to them and that met their need for social interaction and stimulation. The registered manager and staff were committed in ensuring people received appropriate support and care at the end of their lives. The provider had a complaints policy and procedure in place which contained guidance for people and their relatives or visitors on what they could expect if they made a complaint.

Staff told us that the registered manager provided them with leadership, support and was always available to them day and night offering guidance when they needed it. The registered manager had notified us of important events that had happened at the service and understood the need to display the rating. There were systems in place that ensured the registered manager and provider took account of the views of people living at the home and their relatives where appropriate. The service worked well with external organisations including health and social

Woodcroft is a small care home that provides care and support for up to six people who have a learning disability, such as autism or epilepsy. On the day of our inspection six people were living in the home.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Medicines were managed in a safe way and recording of medicines was completed to show people had received the medicines they required.

Staff met with their line manager on a one to one basis to discuss their work. Staff said they felt supported and told us the provider had good management oversight of the home.

People lived in a homely environment and were encouraged to be independent by staff. Staff supported people to keep healthy by providing people with a range of nutritious foods. Everyone was involved in the menu planning and shopping. People had access to external health services and professional involvement was sought by staff when appropriate to help maintain good health.

People were encouraged to take part in a range of activities which were individualised and meaningful for people. We heard people chose what they wished to do on the day.

People had risk assessments in place for identified risks. The registered manager logged any accidents and incidents that occurred and staff responded to these by putting measures in please to mitigate any further accidents or incidents.

Staff had followed legal requirements to make sure that any decisions made or restrictions to people were done in the person’s best interests. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There were a sufficient number of staff on duty to meet people’s needs and support their activities. People and staff interaction was relaxed. It was evident staff knew people well, understood people’s needs and aspirations. Staff were very caring to people and respected their privacy and dignity.

Staff received a good range of training specific to people’s needs. This allowed them to carry out their role in an effective and competent way.

The registered manager and staff undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. Any areas identified as needing improvement were actioned by staff.

If an emergency occurred or the home had to close for a period of time, people’s care would not be interrupted as there were procedures in place.

Appropriate checks, such as a criminal record check, were carried out to help ensure only suitable staff worked in the home. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse and were able to tell us what they would do in such an event and they had access to a whistleblowing policy should they need to use it.

A complaints procedure was available for any concerns. This was displayed in a format that was easy for people to understand. People and their relatives were encouraged to feedback their views and ideas into the running of the home.

People were well cared for by staff who had a good understanding of their needs. We saw people were supported to lead an active live and staff supported them to pursue their individual interests and structured activities. People told us they liked to attend two day centres and meet their friends. Staff were proactive in supporting people maintain friendship groups outside the home, which people said meant a great deal to them.

People who lived in the service told us they liked living there and felt safe. They told us if they were worried about something they knew who to talk to. We saw safeguarding procedures were in place and staff told us they had undertaken training regarding these procedures. During discussion with staff they demonstrated how to safeguarded people they supported.

People's health care needs were discussed with them and we saw how these were managed in health action plans. People were able to visit their GP and we saw one person required the support of an advocate when accessing dental care to ensured they understood what was involved.

Staff told us they enjoyed working in the home and felt they had the training and support required to undertake their roles. They told us additional training was provided when people's needs changed. For example the manager responded with additional manual handling training and behaviour awareness training for staff to ensure they were able to provide safe and appropriate care for people to support their changing needs. People knew how to make a complaint but said they did not have to complain recently. We saw the complaints procedure in place that would be followed to respond to a complaint being made.

We found the service was well managed and and both staff and people who used the service felt well supported by the management structure in place. Systems were in place to manage the quality of service provision that included regular auditing, provider visits and feedback surveys. This ensured the service identified shortfalls and made adjustments to continue to improve.

People who lived in Woodcroft told us that they were happy living there. They told us that the staff were kind and caring and were their friends.

We observed staff interacting with people in an inclusive and respectful way. Two people who used the service told us that they liked to help in the kitchen and were able to wash up.

We observed that people looked comfortable and relaxed in the home and were confident in their surroundings.

People told us that they liked the activates arranged by the home. They told us that they had been involved in planning some of the activities. People told us that they attended and enjoyed going to a variety of day centres. They also told us that they had planned holidays for this year with the staff.

Staff told us that they enjoyed working in the home and said that there was ample training available to enable them to undertake their roles.

Staff had a good understanding of people's needs. They told us that they had undertaken venerable adults training known as safeguarding. They were able to describe the signs to look out for and would have no hesitation in reporting any incidents of abuse or bad practice to their manager.

People who live in the home have varied levels of communication and some people had non verbal communication.

Some people were able to tell us that they liked living in the home and that staff were kind.

One person was able to communicate to us with the help of staff using specific phrases that were individual to him.

We spent time with people and saw that they were able to make their needs known to staff by spoken words, gestures, and signs.

We saw that people were relaxed and at ease in their home, and with the staff caring for them.

People told us how they liked to spend their day while others made us aware with the help of staff what they liked to do and what activities they participate in externally and within the home.