The inspection took place on the 12 and 13 of January 2017 and was unannounced on the first day. At the last inspection the service was meeting all of the legal requirements.

Primrose Road is a learning disability service currently providing support to six older adults.

The service is situated in a quiet residential area; the service is homely and spacious with a large outdoor garden to the rear.

Each person had their own bedroom. There were two bedrooms on the ground floor each with a sink and four bedrooms on the second floor and two of these had a private toilet and sink.

There was a registered manager at Primrose Road. 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 were protected from the risks of abuse as staff knew how to identify different types of abuse and who to report it to. Staff stated they would whistleblow if needed, staff said they were there to speak up for people and protect them.

Risk was also assessed to ensure people were not at risk of harm during moving and handling for example and other areas relating to their care. These assessments were clear and explained how staff should safely support people where there was a risk associated.

Medicines were handled and administered safely and senior staff performed competence checks before staff could administer medicines to people.

Safe recruitment was carried out and records confirmed that people were involved in the recruitment process during interviews. Further records showed that relevant checks on staff’s previous employment history and suitability to work with people with a criminal records check were performed.

The risk of infection was reduced as staff cleaned the service and used colour coded personal protective equipment to minimise the risk of cross contamination.

Emergency procedures were in place and staff demonstrated they would protect people in the event of an emergency.

Staff were trained in a number of areas to ensure they were effective in their jobs. Staff told us they felt supported in their role and records confirmed they received regular supervision and an annual appraisal.

People’s consent was requested before care was given and people were involved in making decision about their daily lives. Where people had been deprived of their liberty this had been documented and authorised by the correct supervisory body.

People were supported to eat healthy meals and staff were observed to support people who needed it in a dignified way.

People were supported by caring, kind and patient staff who were observed spending time speaking to people in a compassionate way.

People had care plans and these were personalised with goals set for each person. People’s family were involved in the planning process and invited to reviews. Staff were knowledgeable of people’s needs and met with people monthly during key working sessions.

Staff encouraged people to share their views and if they were not happy to make a complaint, complaint procedures were written in an easy read format.

A number of activities of people’s choosing took place and people were taken on annual holiday trips.

Staff spoke positively about the management of the service and that they could approach them when needed to discuss any issues relating their job role. Relatives felt they could easily approach management at the service.

The service had a number of quality assurance systems in place to monitor the service provided.

We spoke with two people who used the service, one relative of a person who used the service and four members of staff. People and relatives said, "staff are nice," "I am delighted with the care" and "it's lovely here."

People told us staff asked for their consent before carrying out care. One person said, "They always ask me if it's OK. I say yes." People had signed to say they agreed with their care plans, or if they did not have capacity to do so, next of kin had signed on their behalf.

We found assessments were in place and care was planned in accordance with these. People were involved in planning care and said they were able to participate in activities and household tasks. One person said, "We went to Southend yesterday." Risk management plans were in place and staff were trained in dealing with emergencies.

People told us they had plenty to eat and drink and they chose their own meals. One person said, "It's up to you what you eat here." We found expert advice from speech and language therapists had been used to inform care plans around eating and drinking.

We found equipment was regularly tested and serviced and there was enough equipment to promote people's independence.

Staff told us they felt they had a “particularly positive” team. People and their relatives told us “staff are always smiling” and “staff seem very happy.” We found evidence that staff had regular supervision and appraisals.

We found records were accurate and well-maintained.

On the day of the inspection we found three staff members and five people who use this service at the home. We observed staff treating people with dignity and respect. Interactions between staff and people who use this service were appropriate, friendly and professional.

People that we spoke to told us that felt safe at the home and that all their care needs were effectively met. they told us that staff were kind and helpful. People also told us they had good access to health care professionals such as doctors, district nurses, dentists and chiropodists.

Care plans showed us that the provider had taken care to create an inclusive person centred environment.

People told us that they feel safe, are treated with dignity and respect, and have positive support from staff. One person said that they are asked for their views and attend residents meetings. Relatives told us that the level of support is 'good' and 'couldn't be bettered'. They said that staff have a good attitude.

Primrose Road is a care home providing personal care to six people with learning disabilities. It is a spacious purpose built care home situated in a quiet residential road. It has six bedrooms, two on the ground floor and four on the first floor with lift access.

There was a registered manager at the home. 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.

At the last inspection on 22 August 2013, the service was meeting the legal requirements. This inspection was unannounced and was carried out over two days on 18 and 22 December 2014.

The home provided a safe and secure environment to everybody on the premises. Building maintenance and equipment checks were up to date. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and knew how to report concerns. Medicines were managed safely.

Safe recruitment checks were made. Staff received regular training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They knew the people they were supporting and provided a personalised service. People were involved in their assessment and care planning and staff knew what their preferences were. Risk assessments were carried out to ensure people were able to participate in daily activities and go out as safely as possible.

Each person had an activity plan and staff supported people to make choices using different methods of communication. Staff obtained consent before giving support to people. People had access to healthcare professionals as required. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and the service had a stable staff team.

The registered manager and deputy manager supported people living in the home alongside staff. People knew how to make a complaint. People and staff were able to give feedback through quality surveys which were acted upon.