This inspection took place on 4 and 7 December 2018.

The service provides care and support to six people with a learning disability living in a ‘supported living’ setting, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. When we inspected, there were five people using the service.

People using the service lived in six, self-contained, one-bedroom flats in a single property. The service had an office for staff on site and at night there were two waking night staff available to support people, if needed.

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.

The service had a registered manager who left the service in October 2018. The provider appointed a new manager who was completing their registration with the Care Quality Commission when we inspected. 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 did not always receive the medicines they needed safely and as prescribed.

We saw that applications had been made to the Court of Protection for authorisation to deprive people of their liberty but the provider had not informed the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of the outcome of the applications, as required by the regulations. We discussed this with the provider and they stated they would send us notifications in the future whenever the outcomes of any applications to deprive a person of their liberty made to a court of protection, are known.

The provider had systems in place to monitor quality in the service and make improvements but these were not always effective.

The provider had systems to protect people from abuse, staff had appropriate training and could tell us what they would do if they had concerns about a person.

There were enough staff to support people and the provider carried out checks to make sure new staff were suitable to work in the service.

The provider had procedures to prevent and control the spread of infection and support staff had access to Personal Protective Equipment.

The provider had a set of policies and procedures for the management of the service and we saw they reviewed these regularly.

Support staff completed training the provider considered mandatory. The provider also arranged training specific to the needs of the people using the service. Support staff also told us they found the provider’s training helpful.

Staff had the supervision and support they needed to work effectively with people using the service.

We saw people’s support plans included menus using pictures to encourage people to make choices about what they ate each day.

The provider understood their responsibilities under The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). During the inspection we saw that people were not deprived of their liberty unlawfully.

The provider had an end of life care and support policy and we saw they had reviewed this in October 2016. Staff knew about the policy and told us nobody using the service when we inspected was receiving end of life care.

People’s relatives told us staff were kind and caring. During the inspection we saw that support staff worked with people in a positive and caring way. The staff knew people well and could tell us about their care and support needs.

People using the service had comp