Queens Lodge is a care home that provides respite care for up to 10 younger people with learning disabilities and residential accommodation for up to 10 older people who have learning disabilities in two adjoining houses. At the time of the inspection, there were nine people using the respite service and 10 using the residential care service.

At the last inspection of March 2015, the service was rated Good. We carried out this unannounced inspection of the service on 23 June 2017. At this inspection, we found that the service had maintained its ‘Good’ rating.

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.

People were protected from the risk of harm because staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Staff understood the safeguarding procedures in place about how to keep people safe. Staff were able to raise concerns about abuse and poor practice internally and to external agencies if necessary to protect people.

Appropriate recruitment procedures were followed to ensure suitable staff were employed at the service. Sufficient numbers of suitably skilled staff were deployed to meet the needs of people safely.

People’s care was provided by staff who were supported in their role. Staff received regular supervision and an annual review of their performance to ensure that care provided was effective.

People were supported to take their medicines safely by staff trained and assessed as competent to do so. Staff followed the provider’s procedures and good practice to manage medicines safely.

People received enough food and drink to meet their dietary and hydration needs. People had access to healthcare services when needed and were supported to maintain their health.

Staff provided care and support in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People who lacked capacity were supported appropriately as decisions about their care were made in their best interests.

People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate. Staff had developed positive working relationships with people and treated them with respect. Staff respected people’s privacy and maintained their dignity in all aspects of their care.

People received personalised care that met their individual needs. Staff assessed people’s needs and had guidance on how to deliver effective and safe care. People enjoyed taking part in a wide range of activities for stimulation and social interaction.

People benefitted from a service that had an open and transparent culture. People using the service and staff were happy with how the service was managed.

Regular checks and audits of the service were carried out to ensure the service continued to improve in their standards and practices. The registered manager and provider took action to address any concerns identified.

We spoke with two people who lived at the home. They were satisfied with the care and support they received and were happy living at Queens Lodge. One person told us, "I love it here. It's my home". Another said, "The staff are my friends". A visitor said, "The staff are very caring and understanding". We noted that the home provided a wide range of social events and activities; the people we spoke with were happy with the number and variety of activities on offer. One person receiving respite care was present and able to give their views; the remaining five people were out undertaking daytime activities.

We saw that people's consent was sought, wherever possible, before care and support was provided. We observed that the care given was safe and appropriate and based on effective care planning and risk assessments. This meant that people's individual needs were met and their preferences were taken into account.

People were protected from the risks associated with poor medication management. We saw that medicines were properly handled and administered in line with the provider's policy. We noted that there were sufficient numbers of experienced staff to provide good care. We also found that systems were in place for people and relatives to make a complaint about the service if necessary.

We were unable to speak with people in a meaningful way due to the timing of our visit. We spoke briefly with the few people who were in the home, and they gave the impression they were happy with the care they received. People appeared to tbe comfortable with care staff and there was clearly a warm relationship between them.

When we spoke with staff, they told us about the individual needs and preferences of people staying in the house and those that visited regularly for respite care. It was apparent that they knew the individuals and their families well.

Letters of thanks and cards showed that people were pleased with the care they, or their relative, received and the ongoing support provided by the home. We looked at some of the letters and saw that they commented specifically on how well the staff met the needs of people with complex needs or challenging behaviours.

We noticed that the home had been adapted to allow people as much freedom as possible whilst ensuring they remained safe. People were able to use local community facilities. Many of the people who used the respite care facility attended school or college. Other people were in protected employment in the provider’s own workshops and horticultural centre.

The house for older people with learning disabilities was staffed and arranged separately to the respite care house. This allowed for the needs of the more aged population to be met and for the house to have the feel of a more permanent home.

Queens Lodge is a care home that provides respite care for up to 10 younger people with learning disabilities and residential accommodation for up to 10 older people who have learning disabilities in two adjoining houses. At the time of the inspection, there were nine people using the respite service and 10 using the residential care service.

At the last inspection of March 2015, the service was rated Good. We carried out this unannounced inspection of the service on 23 June 2017. At this inspection, we found that the service had maintained its ‘Good’ rating.

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.

People were protected from the risk of harm because staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Staff understood the safeguarding procedures in place about how to keep people safe. Staff were able to raise concerns about abuse and poor practice internally and to external agencies if necessary to protect people.

Appropriate recruitment procedures were followed to ensure suitable staff were employed at the service. Sufficient numbers of suitably skilled staff were deployed to meet the needs of people safely.

People’s care was provided by staff who were supported in their role. Staff received regular supervision and an annual review of their performance to ensure that care provided was effective.

People were supported to take their medicines safely by staff trained and assessed as competent to do so. Staff followed the provider’s procedures and good practice to manage medicines safely.

People received enough food and drink to meet their dietary and hydration needs. People had access to healthcare services when needed and were supported to maintain their health.

Staff provided care and support in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People who lacked capacity were supported appropriately as decisions about their care were made in their best interests.

People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate. Staff had developed positive working relationships with people and treated them with respect. Staff respected people’s privacy and maintained their dignity in all aspects of their care.

People received personalised care that met their individual needs. Staff assessed people’s needs and had guidance on how to deliver effective and safe care. People enjoyed taking part in a wide range of activities for stimulation and social interaction.

People benefitted from a service that had an open and transparent culture. People using the service and staff were happy with how the service was managed.

Regular checks and audits of the service were carried out to ensure the service continued to improve in their standards and practices. The registered manager and provider took action to address any concerns identified.