Coronation Road is a care home for adults with a learning disability. It provides accommodation and personal care for two people, nursing care is not provided. The building is divided into two separate bungalows for each person that includes a kitchen, lounge dining room, bathroom and bedroom. There are dedicated staff teams for each person.

At the last inspection in November 2014 we had rated the service as ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’ and met each of the fundamental standards we inspected.

There was a new registered manager employed at the service since the last inspection. 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 told us that they were safe living in this home and said that the staff supported them to stay safe in the local community. We saw that people who lived in the home were comfortable with the staff who worked there. People were protected from the risk of abuse because the staff in the home understood their responsibility to keep people safe and the actions to take if they were concerned a person may be at risk of harm.

There were enough staff to provide the care that people needed and to support people to follow the activities they enjoyed. People told us that they liked the staff and said the staff treated them with kindness and respect.

People enjoyed the meals provided in the home. They were included in planning and preparing their own meals and were given support to maintain a healthy diet.

All the staff employed in the home had received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to provide the support people needed. The staff knew how to support people to make choices about their lives and how they communicated their wishes. People were given choices about all aspects of their lives and were supported to maintain their independence.

People were provided with opportunities to follow their interests and hobbies and they were introduced to new activities.

The registered manager of the home was knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, (DoLS). The focus of the home was on promoting individuals’ rights and independence and no one in the home had any restrictions on their right to make their own choices.

Medicines were handled safely in the home and people received their medication as prescribed by their doctor. People told us that the staff in the home supported them to attend health care appointments as they needed. People were supported to maintain good health because they had access to appropriate health care services.

We saw that people in the home were included in decisions about how their care was provided. The atmosphere was open and inclusive. People had been asked for their views about the service and the care they received and action was taken in response to their comments.

People had the opportunity to give their views about the service and a complaints procedure was available and written in a way to help people understand if they did not read. We found no complaints had been received since the last inspection.

The service was well-led and the provider undertook a range of audits to check on the quality of care provided. People living in the home were very positive about the new manager. Staff reported an open and inclusive culture that promoted good team work.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This was an unannounced inspection, carried out by an inspector on 12 November 2014.

We last inspected Coronation Road in November 2013. At that inspection we found the service was meeting all its legal requirements.

Coronation Road is a care home for adults with a learning disability. It provides accommodation and personal care for two people, nursing care is not provided. The building is divided into two separate bungalows to enable each person to live individually.

There was 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.”

Due to their health conditions and complex needs not all of the people were able to share their views about the service they received.

Both people who lived at Coronation Road were relaxed and appeared comfortable with the staff who supported them. One person said; “I feel safe living here, I like the staff.” One relative told us; “My relative is really well looked after here and I’m sure they feel safe.” Another said; “Staff give excellent care and my relative is well settled.”

There were enough staff on duty to provide individual care and support to people and to keep them safe.

We saw detailed care plans were in place to help staff manage and provide consistent care to people who may display distressed behaviour.

People were protected as staff had received training about safeguarding and knew how to respond to any allegation of abuse. When new staff were appointed thorough vetting checks were carried out to make sure they were suitable to work with people who needed care and support

The necessary checks were carried out to ensure the building was safe and fit for purpose.

The location was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff had received training and had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Best Interest Decision Making, when people were unable to make decisions themselves. There were other opportunities for staff to receive training to meet people’s care needs.

People were happy with the food provided and they had choice at mealtimes. They were supported to eat and drink enough to help ensure their nutritional needs were met.

People’s care needs were met as staff provided care that was responsive to their changing needs. Care records were up to date and there was evidence of regular evaluation and review to keep people safe and to ensure staff were aware of their current care and support needs.

People were provided with opportunities to follow their interests and hobbies and they were introduced to new activities.

People had access to health care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment. Staff followed advice given by professionals to make sure people received the treatment they needed. People received their medicines in a safe and timely way.

We found there was an ethos from management to encourage staff to ensure people maintained some control in their lives. There was evidence that people were helped to make choices and to be involved in every day decision making.

The service was well-led. People had the opportunity to give their views about the service. There was regular consultation with people and family members and their views were used to improve the service. We saw a complaints procedure was available and written in a way to help people understand if they did not read. We found no complaints had been received since the last inspection. The provider undertook a range of audits to check on the quality of care provided.

We observed people living in the home were encouraged to voice their opinions and be involved in how their individual care was provided. People were supported to maintain or develop their life skills and were involved in activities within the home. People were supported to access the local community.

We saw staff had completed safe handling of medicines training and had their competency assessed annually.

We saw that the correct checks were carried out before new staff began working with people.

Information was provided in a format that met people’s needs; for example an easy read and pictorial complaints booklet was developed specifically for people.

However we saw that some care records were not fully completed and contained inaccurate information.

There were two people living in the service and both of them had their own bungalow. The bungalows were separated by an adjoining door and each contained a living and dining area, a bedroom, a kitchen and a bathroom.

We met both people living in the service but neither were able to give us detailed information about their views or experiences owing to their speech and language impairments. However, they did give us some information and we were able to observe how they were spoken to by the staff, and the way they responded. The people living in the service were being supported by staff on a two to one basis, and we saw they were responding very positively to the staff who were with them.

One person living in the service showed us around their bungalow and were very happy with the way it was decorated and had been personalised to their taste. They told us by gestures that they were happy with the items they had purchased which made their bungalow very comfortable and pleasantly equipped.

During our visit, the people using the service looked repeatedly to the staff for reassurance when we spoke to them, and the staff provided this support without it being intrusive or inappropriate.

We observed staff assisting the people living in Coronation Road with their usual daily activities, including helping with some domestic tasks, watching television or having meals. They responded to their needs in a professional and pleasant way, and were clear about how the individual was supported. These activities maximised people’s independence while maintaining their safety and wellbeing.

The atmosphere in the bungalows was quiet and calm and the staff were very focused on the people they were supporting.

People who used the service were unable to talk to us about their experience of living at 14 Coronation Road. The care observation we carried out showed people received care and support which met their needs. Staff engaged positively with people and encouraged their participation and involvement in the daily life of the home.

People were offered a choice of suitable and nutritious food and hydration, in sufficient quantities to meet their needs.

The home was clean and hygienic. Staff said they had been told what measures they should take to prevent the spread of infection. They said they had access to the personal protective equipment they needed to keep themselves, and the people they cared for, safe and free from the risk of infection.

People who used the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises and equipment. The home was decorated to a good standard and was well maintained throughout.