This was an announced inspection carried out on 25 and 27 July 2018. At our last inspection in June 2018 we found the service was ‘requires improvement. At this inspection, we found the service had made the required improvements.

Leeds Jewish Welfare Board – 248 Lidgett Lane provides 24-hour care and support to five adults with learning disabilities and is registered to provide accommodation and personal care. The service operates with the cultural needs of Jewish people in mind, however it also caters to the needs of non-Jewish people.

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 conforms with these requirements.

There was a manager in post, however they were in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission at the time of the 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.

There were enough trained staff to meet people’s needs and staff were recruited safely. Some relatives commented that recent changes in staff personnel had an impact on continuity however the service’s recruitment process involved people meeting prospective new staff and approving of them before they were offered a role.

Staff were trained in medicines administration and medicines were managed safely. Staff were also trained to recognised signs of abuse and were able to describe how they would follow the provider’s safeguarding and whistleblowing policies.

There were appropriate health and safety checks in place and there were adequate supplies of personal protective equipment to ensure that staff were able to minimise the risk of infections.

Staff told us they received an adequate induction, training and support from the service. The manager monitored staff performance through spot checks.

People told us staff were kind, caring and compassionate. The service had a warm and jovial atmosphere. People were supported to maintain independent lives, ranging from choosing what they wanted to eat and wear to working in the community and earning a wage. Staff were able to describe how they would protect people’s dignity and privacy.

Care plans contained detailed person-centred guidance on how to care for people in a way they wanted. People were supported to maintain active social lives and participate in activities relevant to their hobbies and interests.

There was a complaints policy and procedure in place, complaints were responded to appropriately and people told us they knew how to raise a complaint.

The service had adequate quality assurance processes in place to monitor and improve on service delivery. The manager was supported by the provider to attend meetings with other managers and gather feedback on good practice.

The service engaged positively with people and their relatives to gather their feedback and make improvements to the service.

This was an announced inspection carried out on the 26 and 27 June 2017. At the last inspection in January 2015 we found the provider met the regulations we looked at.

Leeds Jewish Welfare Board -248 Lidgett Lane provides 24 hour care and support to five adults with learning disabilities and is registered to provide accommodation and personal care. The home operates in accordance with Jewish cultural requirements, but also caters for the needs of people from other faiths. The house is situated in a residential part of the Leeds 17 area close to many local amenities such as shops, doctors, dentists, churches and Synagogues.

At the time of the inspection, the service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC); however, they had left the service some months previously. A new manager had been appointed and was in the process of making their application to become the registered manager. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us and indicated by gestures and body language that they felt safe in their home. Staff could describe and understood their responsibilities to support people and to protect them from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff were recruited safely which ensured they were of a good character to work with people who used this service. People had plans in place to manage risks, which staff understood and followed.

People received their medicines as prescribed and safe systems were in place to manage people's medicines. Staff were trained in medication administration and their competency was checked regularly.

The home and equipment were regularly checked and the provider had plans in place to keep people safe during significant incidents, such as a fire. People who used the service told us they had regular fire drills and this was important to them. One person told us, “We practice and we need to get out quick”. However, the five year periodic safety check of the electrical installation in the home was overdue and had not been checked since 2008. This had put people’s safety at risk and we made a recommendation to the provider about this.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs. People received support from staff who showed kindness and compassion. People’s dignity and privacy was protected Staff understood people's individual needs in relation to their care. Support plans were overall; person centred and reflected individual's preferences.

People were supported to pursue a wide and diverse variety of social activities relevant to their needs, wishes, culture and interests. Arrangements were in place for people to maintain links with the local community, friends and family.

The manager and staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. They had made appropriate referrals to the relevant authorities to ensure people's rights were protected.

People received care and support from staff that had the skills and knowledge to understand their role. Staff training was updated regularly and staff had regular supervision that helped identify training needs and improve the quality of care.

People chose and assisted in the preparation of their food and drink and were supported to maintain a balanced diet where this was required. People had access to healthcare facilities and support that met their needs.

The service had a number of ways of involving people and getting their suggestions for how the service could be improved. People who used the service had been involved in planning and reviewing the care provided. They were also involved in recruitment and some aspects of auditing.

There was an effective complaints procedure for people to raise

This was an announced inspection carried out on the 21 January 2015. At the last inspection in August 2013 we found the provider met the regulations we looked at.

248 Lidgett Lane provides 24 hour care and support to five adults with complex learning disabilities. The home operates in accordance with Jewish cultural requirements, but also caters for the needs of people from other faiths. The house is situated in a residential part of the Leeds 17 an area close to many local amenities such as shops, doctors, dentists, churches and Synagogues. The home has a lift for people to access both floors and landscaped gardens to the rear of the home.

At the time of this inspection the home had a registered manager. 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’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. The support plans included risk assessments; however, support plans did not always contain sufficient and relevant information.

People were supported to make decisions on a day to day basis but where they did not have the mental capacity to make some decisions the service had not carried out mental capacity assessments. The registered manager told us they would complete the relevant assessments and review Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard applications.

We saw there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff. Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work.

People received their prescribed medication when they needed it and appropriate arrangements were in place for the storage and disposal of medicines.

Suitable arrangements were in place and people were provided with a choice of suitable healthy food and drink ensuring their nutritional needs were met.

People’s health was monitored as required which included health conditions and symptoms so appropriate referrals to health professionals could be made.

We observed interactions between staff and people living in the home and staff were respectful to people when they were supporting them. Staff knew how to respect people’s privacy and dignity.

A range of activities were provided both in-house and in the community.

The management team investigated and responded to people’s complaints, according to the provider’s complaints procedure. People we spoke with did not raise any complaints or concerns about living at the home.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw copies of reports produced by the management team.

During our visit we spoke with three members of staff who were able to explain and give examples of how they maintained people’s dignity, privacy and independence. One member of staff told us, “It’s really important that we give people a variety of options and choices to choose from.” Another said, “We always try to involve people in all decisions within the home. We observed staff interacting with people in a caring, respectful manner with regard to their dignity and privacy.

We were able to communicate verbally with three people who used the service. When we asked them if they liked the home and the staff who supported them, they told us they were very happy living in the home and were well cared for by the staff. One person said, “This is my home, this is my room, I like to live here, it is nice, I am happy.” Another person told us, “I don’t want to go anywhere else, the staff are good here, they care about us.”

One member of staff said, “The manager is absolutely great, they put the people who live here first all the time. The residents’ welfare is our main priority.” Another said, “We have all been told about the Whistleblowing Policy. I wouldn’t hesitate to use it if I even suspected someone was at risk but I have never had any concerns working here.”

The home had enough suitability qualified and experienced staff to meet people's needs.

The home had systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service provided.

Some people were not able to verbally tell us their experiences. We therefore used a number of different methods to help us to understand the experiences of people who used the service, including talking with people, looking at records and observing the care being delivered.

People who used the service said they were happy living at the home and they were well looked after. People’s comments included:

“Very nice here.”

“I keep busy and I like that.”

“I have a very nice bedroom.”

People we spoke with said they understood their care and support plans and that staff had explained things well to them.

We saw that people received care and support in an environment that was clean and there were systems in place to minimise the risk of infections. One person said, “It is all kept nice here.”

People who used the service were very complimentary about the staff. Their comments included:

“I like my key worker very much.”

“Staff are very nice and very good.”

We saw that people who used the service were responded to promptly when they asked for any support or assistance, for example, help to make a telephone call. People who used the service said they would speak to staff or the manager if they had any concerns.

We could communicate verbally with some people who use the service to find out their views and experiences. They said they were happy at the home or smiled, nodded and answered ‘yes’ when we asked if they liked the home and the staff who supported them. We saw that people who use the service were very comfortable with staff and had good interaction with them. It was clear that staff knew the people they were supporting very well. Staff showed a good understanding of people’s communication needs whether that was through signs or gestures.

We saw that care practices were good. Staff were kind and supportive to people, they treated people as individuals. Staff gave good examples of how people are treated with dignity and respect. They said it was important to give people choices and encourage independence. They spoke of the importance of being sensitive and discreet when giving support to people.

We saw that people enjoy a wide range of activity and are supported to have an active social life and keep in touch with family and friends. Staff said they like to make sure people who use the service get out at some point each day.

Staff said they had a good team who worked well together. They said the home was well managed and the manager worked alongside them to make sure the service was running well and in the best interests of people who use the service. They said the manager and senior managers were supportive and approachable.