Dixon House is registered to provide nursing or personal care for up to 11 people who have a learning disability. On the day of our inspection there were nine people living in the service.

At the last inspection this service was rated overall Good. This was an unannounced inspection which took place on the 8 and 9 August 2017. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People who used the service told us they felt safe when being supported by staff members at Dixon House. Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and knew their responsibilities to report any concerns. There was also a whistle-blowing policy in place to protect staff who reported poor practice.

Risk assessments such as, epilepsy, bathing, diet and nutrition, bedrooms and manual handling were in place to keep people safe whilst staff members were providing support. These were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they remained relevant and up to date.

Records showed that robust recruitment processes were followed by the service when employing new members of staff. We saw references and identity checks were carried out as well as Disclosure and Barring Service checks.

Medicines were managed safely in the service. Only those people trained to do so were permitted to administer medicines. One person was assessed as being able to self-administer and the relevant risk assessments were in place in relation to this.

Staff received an induction and were supported when they commenced employment to become competent to work with vulnerable people. Staff were well trained and regularly supervised to feel confident within their roles.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

All the people who used the service had been given a copy of the complaints policy and staff knew how to respond to any complaints they may receive. Records we looked at showed there had not been any concerns or complaints raised since our last inspection.

We observed a good rapport between people who used the service and staff. We saw that staff appeared to know people well and understand their needs. People who used the service appeared relaxed.

Care plans we looked at were person centred and contained detailed information that was easy for staff to follow to ensure people’s support needs were met. We saw these were reviewed on a regular basis with the person and their relatives (if they wished). All care records were in an easy read format to assist people to be more involved in the planning of their care and support.

Policies and procedures were in place to guide staff in their roles. These were accessible to all staff and we saw they had been reviewed on an annual basis to ensure they remained relevant and appropriate.

Regular meetings were held with people who used the service, their relatives and staff members to ensure the service received feedback and improve the service. Surveys were also sent out as another means of gaining feedback on the service.

All the people we spoke with who used the service, relatives and staff members told us they felt the management team were approachable and supportive.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Dixon House is registered to provide nursing or personal care for up to 11 people who have a learning disability. On the day of our inspection there were nine people living in the service.

At the last inspection this service was rated overall Good. This was an unannounced inspection which took place on the 8 and 9 August 2017. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People who used the service told us they felt safe when being supported by staff members at Dixon House. Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and knew their responsibilities to report any concerns. There was also a whistle-blowing policy in place to protect staff who reported poor practice.

Risk assessments such as, epilepsy, bathing, diet and nutrition, bedrooms and manual handling were in place to keep people safe whilst staff members were providing support. These were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they remained relevant and up to date.

Records showed that robust recruitment processes were followed by the service when employing new members of staff. We saw references and identity checks were carried out as well as Disclosure and Barring Service checks.

Medicines were managed safely in the service. Only those people trained to do so were permitted to administer medicines. One person was assessed as being able to self-administer and the relevant risk assessments were in place in relation to this.

Staff received an induction and were supported when they commenced employment to become competent to work with vulnerable people. Staff were well trained and regularly supervised to feel confident within their roles.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

All the people who used the service had been given a copy of the complaints policy and staff knew how to respond to any complaints they may receive. Records we looked at showed there had not been any concerns or complaints raised since our last inspection.

We observed a good rapport between people who used the service and staff. We saw that staff appeared to know people well and understand their needs. People who used the service appeared relaxed.

Care plans we looked at were person centred and contained detailed information that was easy for staff to follow to ensure people’s support needs were met. We saw these were reviewed on a regular basis with the person and their relatives (if they wished). All care records were in an easy read format to assist people to be more involved in the planning of their care and support.

Policies and procedures were in place to guide staff in their roles. These were accessible to all staff and we saw they had been reviewed on an annual basis to ensure they remained relevant and appropriate.

Regular meetings were held with people who used the service, their relatives and staff members to ensure the service received feedback and improve the service. Surveys were also sent out as another means of gaining feedback on the service.

All the people we spoke with who used the service, relatives and staff members told us they felt the management team were approachable and supportive.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

During our visit we spoke with two people using the service and two staff. We spoke with other people when they returned from their morning activity.

People told us they were happy with the support they received. One person said, “It’s a nice place; I like it here”. We found people’s support plans contained some useful information about their preferred routines and likes and dislikes. This would help staff to support people in the way they needed and wanted.

All areas of the home were bright, safe and comfortable and there were systems in place to maintain standards of the environment. People had access to a range of appropriate equipment to safely meet their needs and to promote their independence and comfort. One person said, "I like my room it is lovely and quiet; I have all the things that I need".

Staff had undertaken training that gave them the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. One member of staff commented, “It’s a good place; I enjoy working here”. People made positive comments about the staff team. They said, “Staff are very nice” and “Staff are lovely”.

People were encouraged to express their views and opinions of the service through regular meetings, reviews and during day to day discussions with staff and management.

People spoken with told us they were happy with their care and accommodation and said they were treated well by the staff at the home.

People told us they were happy with the current system used to administer their medication. During the inspection we observed a member of staff administering medication to people who used the service and saw that medicines were safely administered.

We found that work had been done to repair the lighting in an en suite shower room. And loose carpets on the staircase and landing had been fitted securely. People told us they felt the entrance lighting and fitted carpets helped them feel safer in their home.

We found there was an up to date homes maintenance log which identified how the premises would be maintained with timescales.

People spoken with told us they were happy with the support they received in the home. They said, “I’ve been here a long time. It’s my home” and “I like it here, it’s nice”.

We looked at the support plans of two people who used the service and saw there were procedures in place to ensure their consent was gained in relation to the care provided.

People spoken with told us they received appropriate support with their medication. We saw systems in place for the administration of medicines. We observed staff who did not follow the homes medicine administration procedure. We saw that not all medicines were stored according to the homes medicine policy. This meant that people might be at risk from the unsafe management of medicine.

People spoken with told us they were happy living at Dixon House. They said, “It’s nice here, I like my bedroom” and “I had a bedroom upstairs, but the one I’m in now is better”. We saw systems in place to record maintenance due in the home. However the provider had not ensured that all areas of the home were safe for people who used the service. This meant that people might be at risk from unsafe surroundings.

We saw evidence that support workers were appropriately qualified and provided with training relevant to their role. We observed staff using inappropriate moving and handling to a person who used the service. This meant that people might be at risk from unsafe care and support practices.

People were involved in planning their care and support and they were supported to make choices and decisions about matters which affected them.

People had no concerns about their care, treatment and support.

People were treated with dignity and their privacy was respected. They were encouraged to be as independent as possible.

They knew about their care plans which explained to support workers what they needed to do to support them and to help meet their needs.

People were being consulted about the service and were always asked what their needs were.