We carried out a comprehensive inspection of Copper Beeches Lodge on 12 September 2017. At the previous inspection the service was rated good.

Copper Beeches Lodge provides accommodation and personal care for up to thirteen people who have a learning disability. During this inspection thirteen people were living at the service.

The service is situated close to the centre of St Austell. Most people living at Copper Beeches Lodge were mobile but some required mobility aids to support them. Some people using the service were supported to use community facilities.

There were two managers registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). On the day of the inspection one of those managers was on duty. The service had experienced staff recruitment issues prior to this inspection. This meant the registered managers were supporting staff members in the delivery of care to people. This had affected some of the management systems including training of new staff members. The service was fully staffed at this inspection and the registered managers had put training dates in place so staff would receive the necessary support to carry out their roles effectively. We have made a recommendation about this issue.

The service was clean, spacious and generally suitable for the people who used the service. However one window did not have a restrictor in place. This was being acted upon once the registered manager was informed. There was limited access to the garden area where people who required mobility aids due to uneven paths. Other health and safety checks had been carried out by the registered managers.

People's safety and well-being had been assessed by the registered manager and risk assessments were in place to minimise any risks and keep them safe. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care and support people required. Visiting professionals told us the service was very responsive to any changes. They said, “If staff have any doubts or concerns they let us know so we can respond to the changes.”

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and acted upon if required. The registered managers understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding and staff had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

Appropriate arrangements were in place for the administration and storage of medicines.

There had been problems in recruiting staff during the early part of the year. This had led to registered managers supporting staff on duty. Recent recruitment had increased staffing levels. There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service. The registered managers had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant checks when they employed staff.

People had their healthcare needs met and there were examples of how people's health needs had been effectively responded to. People were treated with dignity and respect and independence was promoted wherever possible.

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). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and staff were aware of people's nutritional needs. Care records contained evidence of visits to and from external health care specialists.

People were able to do things they enjoyed and keep in touch with those people who were important to them.

People and relatives knew how to raise any complaints they had and were confident staff would take action if this happened.

Checks were undertaken on the quality of the care by the registered manager through regular communication and by seeking the views of people using the service and their relatives.

We spoke with six people who used the service. We received some comments such as “I like it here” and “I’m happy here”. The majority of the conversations were general due to people’s complex communication needs. Therefore we observed how people interacted with staff and saw they appeared to be satisfied with the care they received and approached staff freely without hesitation.

We observed staff interact with people who used the service in a kind and calm manner. We saw staff showed, through their actions, conversations and during discussions with us empathy and understanding towards the people they cared for. We saw that people's privacy and dignity was respected by the way that staff assisted people with their personal care.

We examined people’s care records and found the majority of records were up to date. The registered manager agreed to ensure all care plans were up to date to reflect a person’s current care needs so that care would then be provided by staff in a consistent manner.

We found that people who used the service were involved in making day to day decisions and participated in tasks at home, such as cleaning and doing their laundry. During the visit we noted that people attended a variety of activities so that they had opportunities to pursue their interests.

People were protected from abuse Legal safeguards, which protect people unable to make decisions about their own welfare, were understood by staff and used to protect people’s rights.

People who used the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.

Staff said there were sufficient staff on duty. People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

People who used the service, their representatives, and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted upon.

We spoke with three people who used the service, a visitor to the home, staff, the manager and the provider. We observed the staff talking with people who used the service and saw they were respectful, friendly and supportive to them. The atmosphere in the home was warm and welcoming. We saw people were comfortable with each other and with staff at Copper Beeches Lodge.

Care records showed people made decisions for themselves and we found people’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected and people’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. We saw people’s wishes were respected. We observed people moving around the home without restriction.

Care plans and associated documentation provided sufficient detail to direct and guide staff of the action they needed to take in order to meet people’s assessed care needs. People's records were personalised and provided clear information about the person’s wishes and abilities.

Medicines were stored and administered safely and appropriately.

People were protected from abuse and staff were trained and supported to carry out their roles.

The people using this service told us they liked living in the home. They told us “I’ll give the staff 20 out of 20”, “there’s always lots to do”, and “staff are great”. They also told us that they had choices in how they spent their day, in the furnishings of their room, they are involved in menu planning and food shopping and the activities that they participate in. From our conversations none of the people who use the service could identify any areas for improvement.

People who use the service met us and made us tea and were keen to show us their rooms. They told us about how they spent their time, from attending work placements, day placements, college, church, choir, sport facilities as well as enjoying activities within Copper Beeches Lodge. People also told us that they were involved in household tasks, such as doing their own personal laundry, cleaning their rooms and helping with food preparation. No one we spoke with could think of any improvements needed to the care or support that they receive at Copper Beeches Lodge.

We carried out a comprehensive inspection of Copper Beeches Lodge on 12 September 2017. At the previous inspection the service was rated good.

Copper Beeches Lodge provides accommodation and personal care for up to thirteen people who have a learning disability. During this inspection thirteen people were living at the service.

The service is situated close to the centre of St Austell. Most people living at Copper Beeches Lodge were mobile but some required mobility aids to support them. Some people using the service were supported to use community facilities.

There were two managers registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). On the day of the inspection one of those managers was on duty. The service had experienced staff recruitment issues prior to this inspection. This meant the registered managers were supporting staff members in the delivery of care to people. This had affected some of the management systems including training of new staff members. The service was fully staffed at this inspection and the registered managers had put training dates in place so staff would receive the necessary support to carry out their roles effectively. We have made a recommendation about this issue.

The service was clean, spacious and generally suitable for the people who used the service. However one window did not have a restrictor in place. This was being acted upon once the registered manager was informed. There was limited access to the garden area where people who required mobility aids due to uneven paths. Other health and safety checks had been carried out by the registered managers.

People's safety and well-being had been assessed by the registered manager and risk assessments were in place to minimise any risks and keep them safe. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care and support people required. Visiting professionals told us the service was very responsive to any changes. They said, “If staff have any doubts or concerns they let us know so we can respond to the changes.”

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and acted upon if required. The registered managers understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding and staff had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

Appropriate arrangements were in place for the administration and storage of medicines.

There had been problems in recruiting staff during the early part of the year. This had led to registered managers supporting staff on duty. Recent recruitment had increased staffing levels. There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service. The registered managers had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant checks when they employed staff.

People had their healthcare needs met and there were examples of how people's health needs had been effectively responded to. People were treated with dignity and respect and independence was promoted wherever possible.

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). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and staff were aware of people's nutritional needs. Care records contained evidence of visits to and from external health care specialists.

People were able to do things they enjoyed and keep in touch with those people who were important to them.

People and relatives knew how to raise any complaints they had and were confident staff would take action if this happened.

Checks were undertaken on the quality of the care by the registered manager through regular communication and by seeking the views of people using the service and their relatives.