This inspection took place on 1 and 6 March 2017 and was unannounced. This meant the staff and registered provider did not know we would be visiting.

30 Southview provides care and accommodation for up to three people. The home specialises in the care of people who have a learning disability. On the day of our inspection there were a total of three people using the service.

We last inspected the service in December 2014 and rated the service as ‘Good.’ At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’ and met all the fundamental standards we inspected against.

The home had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 who used the service made complimentary statements about the standard of care provided. They told us they liked living at the home, liked the people they lived with and they got along with staff who were friendly and helped them. We saw staff treated people with dignity, compassion and respect and people were encouraged to be as independent as possible.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the present needs of people using the service. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place at this location and carried out background checks when they employed staff to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Staff training records were up to date and staff received regular supervisions, appraisals and training / development plans were also completed, which meant that staff were properly supported to provide care to people who used the service.

We saw that people were supported to take part in interesting and meaningful activities. They took part in education, leisure and social events and staff were constantly looking for more opportunities for people to enjoy.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services. People were supported and encouraged to have regular health checks and were always accompanied by staff to hospital appointments and emergencies.

People at the home were regularly asked for their views about the service and if there was anything they would like to improve. People we spoke with told us that they knew how to make a complaint and found the registered manager approachable with no concerns about the service.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and risk assessments were in place. The registered manager understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding and staff had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

We saw medicines audits were carried out regularly by the management team to make sure people received the treatment they needed.

There were robust procedures in place to make sure people were protected from abuse and staff had received training about the actions they must take if they saw or suspected that abuse was taking place.

People told us they were offered a selection of meals and there were always alternatives available. We saw that each individual’s preference was catered for and people were supported to make their own meals and ensure their nutritional needs and tastes were met.

The registered provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and was following the requirements in the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The registered provider had an effective complaints procedure in place and people who used the service were made aware of how to make a complaint.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager and were comfortable raising any concerns. People who used the service and their relatives were consulted about the quality of the servi

We inspected this service on 30 December 2014.

30 Southview provides care and accommodation for up to three people. The home specialises in the care of people who have a learning disability. On the day of our inspection there were a total of three people using the service.

The home had a registered manager in place. ‘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.’

On the day of the inspection there was a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the home and we saw staff interacted with people in a very friendly and respectful manner. One person told us, “It’s lush. I like it here. We have meetings. I’m choosing the wallpaper for my wall. I can choose what to wear and what to do. I recently went shopping with staff to Newcastle”.

We spoke with two care staff who told us they felt supported and that the registered manager was very approachable. Throughout the day we saw that people and staff appeared very comfortable and relaxed with the registered manager and staff on duty.

People had their physical and mental health needs monitored. There were regular reviews of people’s health and the home responded to people’s changing needs. People were assisted to attend appointments with various health and social care professionals to ensure they received care, treatment and support for their specific conditions.

We saw people’s care plans were very person centred and written in a way to describe their care, treatment and support needs. These were regularly evaluated, reviewed and updated. The care plan format was easy for service users to understand by using of lots of pictures and symbols. We saw lots of evidence to demonstrate that people were involved in all aspects of their care plans.

The care staff we spoke with said they received appropriate training, good support and regular supervision. We saw records to support this.

The care staff understood the procedures they needed to follow to ensure that people were safe. They were able to describe the different ways that people might experience abuse and the correct steps to take if they were concerned that abuse had taken place.

Our observations during the inspection showed us that people were supported by sufficient numbers of staff. We saw staff were responsive to people’s needs and wishes and we viewed records that showed us staff were enabled to maintain and develop their skills through training and development activities. The staff we spoke with confirmed they attended training and development activities to maintain their skills. We also viewed records that showed us there were safe recruitment processes in place.

Procedures for dealing with emergencies were in place and staff were able to describe these to us.

For example, there was a lone working policy and on call procedures for people to follow if staff needed support or guidance.

The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Although no DoLS applications had been made, staff were able to describe the circumstances when an application should be made and knew how to submit one.

Throughout the day we saw staff interacting with people in a very caring and professional way. We saw a member of staff offering to assist a person to go out shopping. The staff were gentle and encouraging and the person happily agreed to their support. We saw when staff offered support to people they always respected their wishes. For example, one person indicated to the registered manager that he would prefer to be supported that day by the member of staff on duty in the sister home located opposite to 30 Southview and owned by the same provider. The manager told us service users often decided who they wished to be supported by each day. The person’s wishes were respected and the staff swapped over. We saw people being offered the choice of what to have to eat for their lunch.

We saw activities were personalised for each person. People also made suggestions about activities and outings during regular house meetings. Where necessary additional staff were provided to enable people to enjoy a range of community facilities and also to support people to attend health care appointments.

People received a balanced diet. We saw people could choose what they wanted to eat each day and this was supported by the staff. There was fresh fruit available so people could help themselves.

We saw the provider had policies and procedures for dealing with medicines and these were followed by staff. In order to promote individualised care, people had a lockable facility in their bedrooms in which their medication was stored securely.

The provider had a pictorial complaints procedure which people felt they were able to use. Both people we spoke with told us they had a keyworker and if they were not happy they would talk to their keyworker, staff or the registered manager about their concerns.

We discussed the quality assurance systems in place with the registered manager. We were told audits of accidents and incidents were carried out and these were investigated by the registered manager to ensure risks were identified and improvements made. We saw records that showed us this took place. We also saw the views of the people using the service were regularly sought and used to make changes.