This inspection took place on 25 May 2017 and was unannounced. Ridgeview is a care home which provides care and support for up to four people with learning disabilities. At the time of this inspection there were three people using the service.

At the last inspection on 29 December 2014 and was rated ‘Good’.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

People and relatives told us that they felt safe with the staff that supported them. Staff understood how to keep people safe and protect them from abuse.

People’s individual risk associated with their health and care needs had been identified and appropriate guidance had been provided so that staff were able to support people in order to reduce or mitigate risks.

Safe recruitment practises were noted which ensured that all staff employed by the service were assessed as being safe to work with vulnerable people.

Medicines were managed, handled and stored securely. Appropriate systems and processes were in place to ensure medicines were administered to people safely and appropriately.

The service always ensured that people were assessed as having capacity and were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff were observed supporting people in the least restrictive way. The provider had policies and systems in place to support this practice.

Staff demonstrated a good level of understanding of the key principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how this was to be implemented when supporting people.

Staff received a comprehensive induction as well as relevant training which supported them to carry out their role effectively. Staff confirmed that they were appropriately supported through various ways which included regular supervision and annual appraisals.

People were involved in devising their own weekly menu plans which took into account their choices and preferences of what they wanted to eat.

People were supported to access a variety of health care services such as GP’s, chiropodists, community mental health nurses and psychiatrists.

Care plans were person centred and provided detailed information about the care and support that people required. Staff knew people well and were aware of each person’s individual needs which included their likes, choices, needs and preferences.

Relatives confirmed that they did not have any concerns about the care that was provided and they knew who to speak with if they did have any issues to raise.

Appropriate systems and processes were in place which monitored the quality of the care and support that was provided within the home in order to learn and make improvements to the delivery of care. This included medicine audits, health and safety checks and the completion of satisfaction surveys.

We observed care staff and management approach and speak with people in a way that was caring and positive. Relatives and staff also confirmed that they were able to approach the registered manager at any time and were listened to.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This inspection took place on 25 May 2017 and was unannounced. Ridgeview is a care home which provides care and support for up to four people with learning disabilities. At the time of this inspection there were three people using the service.

At the last inspection on 29 December 2014 and was rated ‘Good’.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

People and relatives told us that they felt safe with the staff that supported them. Staff understood how to keep people safe and protect them from abuse.

People’s individual risk associated with their health and care needs had been identified and appropriate guidance had been provided so that staff were able to support people in order to reduce or mitigate risks.

Safe recruitment practises were noted which ensured that all staff employed by the service were assessed as being safe to work with vulnerable people.

Medicines were managed, handled and stored securely. Appropriate systems and processes were in place to ensure medicines were administered to people safely and appropriately.

The service always ensured that people were assessed as having capacity and were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff were observed supporting people in the least restrictive way. The provider had policies and systems in place to support this practice.

Staff demonstrated a good level of understanding of the key principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how this was to be implemented when supporting people.

Staff received a comprehensive induction as well as relevant training which supported them to carry out their role effectively. Staff confirmed that they were appropriately supported through various ways which included regular supervision and annual appraisals.

People were involved in devising their own weekly menu plans which took into account their choices and preferences of what they wanted to eat.

People were supported to access a variety of health care services such as GP’s, chiropodists, community mental health nurses and psychiatrists.

Care plans were person centred and provided detailed information about the care and support that people required. Staff knew people well and were aware of each person’s individual needs which included their likes, choices, needs and preferences.

Relatives confirmed that they did not have any concerns about the care that was provided and they knew who to speak with if they did have any issues to raise.

Appropriate systems and processes were in place which monitored the quality of the care and support that was provided within the home in order to learn and make improvements to the delivery of care. This included medicine audits, health and safety checks and the completion of satisfaction surveys.

We observed care staff and management approach and speak with people in a way that was caring and positive. Relatives and staff also confirmed that they were able to approach the registered manager at any time and were listened to.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

At our last inspection of this care home, the provider was not compliant with two standards. We had found that some staff had been working with people before appropriate checks of their character had been completed. Some staff training arrangements did not provide appropriate support to enable them to deliver care to people safely and to an appropriate standard. The provider sent us an action plan addressing our concerns.

At this inspection we found that improvements had been made. One new staff member was working at the service. We found that the provider completed appropriate recruitment checks, to make sure the new staff member was of good character. This took place before they began working with people using the service.

We also found that staff were trained to deliver care to people safely and to an appropriate standard. Further training had been provided to staff, through the local authority’s training department, in the areas of emergency first aid and safeguarding adults from abuse. New staff were now completing a documented induction process.

We spoke with people using the service and a visiting healthcare professional during the inspection. They all spoke positively of their experience of the service. For example, a person using the service told us, “it’s a nice home.” The visiting healthcare professional said, “the people here seem happy.” We found that there were effective systems to assess and monitor quality and risk at the service.

We spoke with the three people who were using the service at the time of our visit, and a healthcare professional. Everybody was happy with the quality of services provided. Comments included, “it’s nice here” and “staff look after me.” People spoke positively about a recent holiday they had been supported on. We found that people experienced care and support that met their needs.

People confirmed that staff were respectful to them and listened to them. Comments included, “they treat me nicely.” We saw that staff understood and responded to people’s communications. We found that people’s views and experiences were taken into account in respect of the care provided.

People spoke positively about food and drink. Comments included, “it tastes nice.” We found that people were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration.

People told us they were happy with the staff provided, saying for example, “the staff are alright.” We found minor concerns, however, that some staff had been working with people before written references in relation to previous care employment had been acquired. This put people at risk of receiving care from someone who may not be of good character.

We also found that staff training arrangements, in respect of safeguarding adults, emergency first aid, and induction of new staff, did not provide appropriate support to enable them to deliver care to people safely and to an appropriate standard.

We spoke with two of the three people who use the service. People felt staff knew how to meet their needs. One person told us, “I like it here” and said this had always been the case. Care plans recognised people’s needs and guided staff on how to meet needs.

Both people we spoke with about the food felt it was good. One person told us, “There’s plenty to eat.”

We saw that people were involved and consulted about decisions affecting their care. They were being supported, where needed, to engage in activities in the local community.

People who use services told us that they are happy with care and support they received. They confirmed that they were treated with respect and that they made choices about their lives. As one person put it, “Staff treat me nice.” Staff were spoken about positively, with comments including that staff are “kind” and that the manager “is always here.”

People told us that they had enough things to do that they liked. One person told us for instance that they went to a “holiday camp” with staff. Another said that they do go out, meaning that there were staff to support with that. People confirmed that they were generally happy with the food provided and the physical environment. They also told us that they get support with health matters, for example from doctors.

In summary, people spoke positively about the service. One person’s comment summed up people’s views: “I like it here.”