We conducted an inspection of Admiral House on 8 February 2017. Admiral House is a residential and rehabilitation care home for up to 12 men with mental health needs. There were 12 men using the service when we visited. At our previous inspection on 21 May 2015 we rated this service “good”. We made one recommendation in relation to conducting regular care planning reviews and this recommendation had been followed. At this inspection we found that the service remained “good”.

There was a registered manager at 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.

Staff had completed medicines administration training within the last two years and were clear about their responsibilities.

Risk assessments and care plans contained clear information for staff. Records were reviewed every month or where the person’s care needs had changed.

Staff demonstrated knowledge of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Care records documented that consent had been obtained where necessary and records were signed by people using the service.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of people’s life histories and current circumstances and supported people to meet their individual needs in a caring way.

People using the service were involved in decisions about their care and how their needs were met. People had care plans in place that reflected their assessed needs.

Recruitment procedures ensured that only staff who were suitable worked within the service. There was an induction programme for new staff, which prepared them for their role. Staff were provided with appropriate training to help them carry out their duties. Staff received regular supervision and appraisals of their performance and these were documented. There were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs.

People were supported to maintain a balanced, nutritious diet. People were supported effectively with their health needs and were supported to access a range of healthcare professionals as required.

People using the service and staff felt able to speak with the registered manager and provided feedback on the service. They knew how to make complaints and there was a complaints policy and procedure in place.

The organisation had adequate systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. This included daily monitoring of medicines and medicines administration charts (MAR) and monthly care plan review meetings. We saw evidence that feedback was obtained by people using the service and the results of this was positive.

This inspection took place on 21 May 2015 and was unannounced. The service met the requirements of the regulations during the previous inspection which took place on 7 January 2014.

There was a registered manager at 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.

Admiral House is a residential and rehabilitation care home for up to 12 men with mental health needs. It is located in Streatham, South-West London and is close to amenities such as a high street, parks and has good transport links.

There were nine people living at the service at the time of our inspection. People living at the service stay for up to two years before moving onto more independent accommodation. However, there was one person who had been living at the service for five years.

The home was arranged over four floors. Bedrooms were located on the ground, first and second floor. The kitchen, lounge and a smoking room were in the basement. There was smaller lounge on the first floor.

People using the service told us they felt safe living at the home. They told us they led independent lives and were encouraged to manage aspects of their care such as administering medicines if it was safe to do so. Some people had restrictions placed on them under the Mental Health Act, however those who did not were able to leave the home without restriction. People were supported to maintain family and community links and said they would not hesitate to raise concerns if they were unhappy about any aspect of their care.

Staff told us they felt supported and were provided with training and opportunities to further their career. There were enough staff employed by the service. A long standing staff team worked at the service which meant that staff were familiar with the needs of people using the service. People told us they felt comfortable speaking with staff about issues that concerned them. We observed this to be the case during the inspection.

People had their nutritional and healthcare needs met by the service. People were encouraged to prepare their evening meal. The service was well stocked with food and people were supported by staff to improve their cooking skills. People were supported to take medicines on time and were registered with clinicians such as a GP and dentist. They attended regular community psychiatric nurse (CPN) review meetings for their mental health needs.

We found that some people did not have their religious needs met by the service. However, the provider was quick to rectify this once we had highlighted it during the inspection.

Rehabilitation and improving people’s daily living skills was a core part of the service. People met their key workers regularly and information was shared with relevant health and social care professionals to help ensure people were supported in all aspects of their lives. We found that although care plans were reviewed regularly, goal monitoring for people was not always effective. We have made a recommendation to the provider about this.

The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of the service and its people. Regular audits of records and health and safety were completed.

On the day of our inspection there were nine men living at the house; another person was away on a holiday. There were two staff on duty.

We saw that people who used the service could come and go freely and that visitors were welcome. We spoke with both members of staff, three people who used the service, visiting family members and a visiting professional.

We found the premises to be well maintained and clean. People were kept safe from abuse and were encouraged to live active lives. Staff were trained and supported to do their jobs.

Comments people made to us were, ‘you are given space to achieve’ and ‘this is a good place, it suits my relative’, ‘any problems are solved’ and ‘they help you get back on your feet’.

During our visit we spoke with four people who use the service, the manager and deputy manager. We also contacted a member of staff by telephone following our visit.

The building was well maintained, clean and tidy and we observed the staff supporting the people who use the service in a positive and friendly manner. A person we spoke with said "The staff do what they have to do but you can still have a laugh with them". Another person we spoke with said they consider some of the staff friends.

The people we spoke with understood their care and treatment, both at the home and from the local health services. People said they liked the staff, and found them supportive and friendly – they felt able to approach them if they had any concerns. People told us they felt safe in the home, and liked their rooms and the communal spaces.