We inspected 1-3 Emily Jackson Close on 21 and 22 September 2017. This was an unannounced inspection. 1-3 Emily Jackson Close provides accommodation with personal care and support to 18 people with learning disabilities and physical disabilities. The service is split into three bungalows that can accommodate up to six people each. People had multiple and complex needs and were unable to tell us about their experiences of using the service.

At our last inspection on 4th April 2017, the service was rated as Good. At this inspection, we found the service remained Good.

There was no registered manager in post. At the time of our inspection, an acting manager in post was going through the processes with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to register. 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.

The provider had systems in place to protect people against abuse and harm. The registered provider had effective policies and procedures that gave staff guidance on how to report abuse. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of the safeguarding policy and procedures.

Risks to people's safety had been assessed and actions taken to protect people from the risk of harm. Risk assessments were personalised to people's needs and reviewed on a regular basis and when required.

Staff recruitment practices ensured that staff were safe to work with vulnerable adults. There were enough staff on duty to provide safe personalised care. Trained competent staff managed medicines safely. There were regular audits carried out by trained staff to identify any areas for improvement and to ensure there were sufficient levels of stock.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were adhered to for more complex decisions. People's mental capacity was being assessed appropriately and meetings took place to make decisions on people's behalf and in their best interests, when they were unable to do so. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. Appropriate applications to restrict people's freedom had been submitted and the least restrictive options were considered as per the MCA.

People were assisted with their nutrition and hydration needs. The acting manager involved a dietician to give guidance to staff on appropriate diets and methods. People who were at risk of pressure sores had appropriate assessments in place that identified methods to mitigate risk.

People living at the service had access to a wide range of activities that were tailored to their needs. People would go on regular outings with staff to places they enjoyed going. People told us they were very satisfied with the care staff and the support they provided. Relatives told us they were happy with the service their loved ones received. People and their relatives told us they were involved in the planning of their care. Care plans were being reviewed on a monthly basis by staff. Staff respected people's privacy and dignity at all the times. The provider had ensured that people's personal information was stored securely and access only given to those that needed it.

The acting manager was approachable and took an active role in the day to day running of the service. Staff felt confident to approach the acting manager with any concerns they may have. The acting manager encouraged relatives and staff to voice their opinions of the service through regular meetings and surveys. The acting manager used effective auditing systems to

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 29 July 2015. A breach of legal requirements was found. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements 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 those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for 1-3 Emily Jackson Close on our website at www.cqc.org.uk”

1-3 Emily Jackson Close provides accommodation with personal care and support to 18 people with learning disabilities and physical disabilities. The accommodation is split into three bungalows with up to six people living in each one. Each bungalow is self-sufficient with its own kitchen, dining room, lounges and garden

.

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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The provider had ensured there were sufficient numbers of staff available for people living at the service to pursue activities. Additional staff were allocated on days that trips away from the service were organised.

The provider had systems in place to protect people against the potential risk of abuse and harm. The registered provider had effective policies and procedures that gave staff guidance on how to report abuse.

Risks to people's safety had been assessed and actions taken to protect people from the risk of harm

Medicines were managed safely and people had access to their medicines when they needed them.

There was sufficient numbers of staff to provide care to people throughout the day and night. When staff were recruited, they were subject to checks to ensure they were safe to work in the care sector.

The provider had ensured that people lived in a safe environment by ensuring effective auditing systems were in place to identify when safety certificates were to be reviewed and by providing appropriate environmental risk assessments.

This inspection took place on 29 July 2015.

We last inspected the service when it was registered at a different address. At this time the service was meeting the requirements of the regulations.

1-3 Emily Jackson Close provides accommodation with personal care and support to 18 people with learning disabilities and physical disabilities. People had multiple and complex needs and were unable to tell us about their experiences of using the service. We spent time with people and spoke with their relatives and staff to understand whether the care was meeting their needs.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the care and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law. 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 registered manager of this service oversees the running of the full service and is supported by assistant service managers who are allocated to each of the three bungalows.

There were not sufficient numbers of staff deployed in the service to meet people’s social needs. The service had vacancies for care staff that the registered manager had found difficult to fill. We found that there were often only two staff on duty which meant that people could not choose to go out if they wanted to. People had not been offered sufficient opportunities to go out during July and one person had missed a friend’s birthday party due to staff shortages.

People’s relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. They told us “It’s wonderful” and

“The attention they give people is wonderful.” People were safe using the service. Staff understood how to protect them from abuse and how to respond to any concerns about their wellbeing. A relative told us “I have no concerns, X is very safe there.”

Staff understood and promoted people’s rights. Where people could not make their own decisions staff followed the correct procedures to make a decision on their behalf.

People were supported to take their medication in a safe way. They had their health needs met quickly and staff had followed advice from health professionals that had improved people’s well-being.

The service was clean and staff knew what action to take to reduce the risk of infection. Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and staff had taken appropriate action to keep people safe. Staff knew how to respond to emergencies.

The procedures for recruiting new staff were robust, ensuring that new staff were fully checked to ensure they were suitable to work with people.

Staff received the training and support they needed to provide safe and effective care. Staff were confident in their roles and understood people’s needs. Staff knew people well and treated them with respect. A relative told us that the staff “Really care about people.” Staff respected people’s individual needs and preferences. They knew what was important to people and delivered personalised care.

People were given a choice of food and drinks and were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts. The bungalows in which people lived had been adapted to meet their physical needs. This included providing lowered kitchen worktops to enable people to prepare their own meals.

People were encouraged to achieve their goals. They were supported to have their voices heard in their local community and to undertake valued roles.

The service was well led. The provider had a clear vision and values, which was reflected in the way the service was managed. There was an open culture that encouraged feedback from people. Their relatives and from staff. One person’s relative told us “I have total confidence in them.” The registered manager used systems effectively to check that people received a high quality service.