This inspection took place on 5 December 2016 and was unannounced.

The service is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to four people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection four people were using the service. At our previous inspection in November 2015 we found that where people were not able to make decisions, information was not available to demonstrate how decisions had been made in their best interests. We also identified that people may be subject to restrictions as monitoring equipment was used to keep people safe. On this inspection we saw improvements had been made and where people lacked capacity to make certain decisions; decisions were made in consultation with people who were important to them and made in their best interests. Restrictions had been identified and applications had been made to ensure these were lawful.

The service had two registered managers who worked together to manage the service. 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.

People were supported to take risks at home and when out and encouraged to be independent and learn new life skills. Risks were assessed and reviewed to keep people safe and protect them from avoidable harm. People were protected from unnecessary harm by staff who knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report concerns in line with local safeguarding adult’s procedures. Staffing was organised flexibly to enable people to be involved with activities and do the things they enjoyed. People had opportunities to be involved with a variety of activities and could choose what to be involved with.

Medicines were managed safely to ensure that people received their medicines as prescribed and to keep well. Staff knew how to support people to eat well and there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet peoples need.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff who knew them well. People were given time and explanations to help them make choices. We saw that people’s privacy and dignity was respected. People liked the staff who supported them and had developed good relationships with them. People maintained relationships with their families and friends who were invited to join in activities with them.

People received personalised care and were confident that staff supported them in the way they wanted to be supported. Staff knew people’s likes and dislikes and care records reflected how people wanted to be supported and how care was provided.

People and relatives knew how to make complaints and they felt that the staff and registered manager were approachable. Complaints were managed in line with the provider’s complaints procedure and people were informed of any investigation and actions.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and provider. Regular quality checks were completed so that people could comment on the quality of service provision. Where necessary, improvements were made to the service.

This inspection took place on 5 December 2016 and was unannounced.

The service is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to four people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection four people were using the service. At our previous inspection in November 2015 we found that where people were not able to make decisions, information was not available to demonstrate how decisions had been made in their best interests. We also identified that people may be subject to restrictions as monitoring equipment was used to keep people safe. On this inspection we saw improvements had been made and where people lacked capacity to make certain decisions; decisions were made in consultation with people who were important to them and made in their best interests. Restrictions had been identified and applications had been made to ensure these were lawful.

The service had two registered managers who worked together to manage the service. 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.

People were supported to take risks at home and when out and encouraged to be independent and learn new life skills. Risks were assessed and reviewed to keep people safe and protect them from avoidable harm. People were protected from unnecessary harm by staff who knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report concerns in line with local safeguarding adult’s procedures. Staffing was organised flexibly to enable people to be involved with activities and do the things they enjoyed. People had opportunities to be involved with a variety of activities and could choose what to be involved with.

Medicines were managed safely to ensure that people received their medicines as prescribed and to keep well. Staff knew how to support people to eat well and there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet peoples need.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff who knew them well. People were given time and explanations to help them make choices. We saw that people’s privacy and dignity was respected. People liked the staff who supported them and had developed good relationships with them. People maintained relationships with their families and friends who were invited to join in activities with them.

People received personalised care and were confident that staff supported them in the way they wanted to be supported. Staff knew people’s likes and dislikes and care records reflected how people wanted to be supported and how care was provided.

People and relatives knew how to make complaints and they felt that the staff and registered manager were approachable. Complaints were managed in line with the provider’s complaints procedure and people were informed of any investigation and actions.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and provider. Regular quality checks were completed so that people could comment on the quality of service provision. Where necessary, improvements were made to the service.

We spoke briefly with two of the four people who used the service and we looked at what people had said in a survey the provider had carried out a month before our inspection. It was clear to us from what people expressed that they were very pleased with their experience of the service. They told us that they had enjoyed activities they had participated in before we arrived and they were complimentary about the staff. People's responses to the survey showed that they liked living at the home and enjoyed the facilities at the home. Comments included `I like the house'; 'I like the bedroom and facilities, the food, the staff' and `I'm comfortable here.'

People were able to express that they had choices about how they spent their time and how they had been involved in decisions about their care and support. One person said in the survey, 'I can go to my room when I want. I have options. I chose the colours in my bedroom.' People expressed that they enjoyed their activities, one person said that they were kept occupied. We saw from records we looked at that all four people had been supported to lead active lives at home and in the community.

We found that staff understood people's health and social needs. People's support plans included detailed information about how staff needed to support people. People and their advocates had expressed a high level of satisfaction with the care and support that had been provided.

We met all 4 people who live at the service. We found that it would take time to understand people’s various methods of communication. Staff present knew the people well and were helpful in enabling us to understand some of the communication methods used by each person.

We found representatives gave positive accounts about all the staff and they told us they were “very satisfied by the care provided”.

We spoke with 3 people’s family members and a representative. They told us, “The care provided is wonderful, I could not ask for better care”. “We attend medical and dental appointments for our relative with staff, in this way we continue to be involved in all decision made about our relatives care needs”.

We asked people at the home if they felt safe. Staff interpreted their responses as replying "yes" to the question. We asked four representatives if they thought people were safe at this home. They all told us they had no concerns.

We saw staff engaged well with people using the service. Representatives told us staff were approachable and helpful at all times. We observed staff who were able to carry out their duties.

We observed people in the home they all looked satisfied and contented. We saw people were listened to and were relaxed when they interacted with staff on duty.