Southside Partnership – Ambleside Avenue provides care for up to six people living with a learning disability, some of whom have additional physical disabilities and sensory impairments. The facilities at Ambleside Avenue are suitable for people with a range of mobility needs, there is a passenger lift allowing access to the first floor and off road parking is available. Sensory features assist people who are visually impaired to become familiar with the building. On the day of our inspection there were five people using the service.

At the last inspection in December 2014, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection, we found the service remained Good and demonstrated they continued to meet our regulations.

People were safe as staff knew how to identify abuse and understood the procedures to follow if they had concerns about people’s well-being and safety. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and equality and diversity to develop their knowledge on how to keep people safe. Staff identified risks to people and plans were put in place to mitigate against potential harm.

There were sufficient numbers of skilled staff to support people meet their needs. People’s care was provided by staff who were trained and skilled to carry out their roles. Staff were supported in their role and received training and supervisions to ensure they provided care that was effective. Appropriate recruitment checks ensured that staff were suitable to provide people’s care.

Medicines were managed safely and stored securely. People received the support they required to take their medicines safely from staff trained and assessed as competent to do so.

People had their rights upheld as required under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People consented to care and treatment and where they were unable to do so, best interests procedures were followed.

People received enough to eat and drink and they enjoyed the food provided at the service. People’s nutritional and dietary needs were met. Staff made appropriate referrals to healthcare professionals to ensure people were supported to maintain their wellbeing and to have their health needs met.

People’s care was delivered in a kind, caring and dignified manner. Staff treated people with respect and upheld their dignity and privacy. People were supported to do as much as possible for themselves. Staff understood the importance of giving people choice about their care and respected their decisions. People’s care was provided in the least restrictive way possible. People were supported to access advocacy services to have their views heard on matters that were important to them.

People, their relatives and healthcare professionals were involved in the planning and review of their care. Staff reviewed regularly people’s needs and updated their care plans to reflect changes in their health and the support they required. People received support that was appropriate to their needs. People took part in activities of their choosing which they enjoyed and were supported to follow their interests.

People had access to information about how to make a complaint or raise a concern. Staff supported people to make their views about the service known and their feedback was valued.

The culture at the service was open, transparent and promoted a person centred approach when providing individual care. Staff and healthcare professionals had positive comments about how the service was run. Staff were supported in their role and felt valued at the service.

The quality of the service and safety of people was monitored regularly and improvements made when necessary.

Southside Partnership - Ambleside Avenue provides personal care and accommodation for up to six people with learning disabilities and a range of other physical and sensory needs. At the time of our visit there were six people living in the home.

At our last inspection on 18 December 2013 the service was meeting the regulations inspected.

There is 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.

Staff were knowledgeable in recognising signs of potential abuse. They knew the action to take to keep people safe and the reporting procedures to follow.

Staff had the correct information to administer medicines safely and people received medicines when they were prescribed.

Recruitment procedures were safe and there were enough staff available to care for people. Staff had received appropriate training to enable them to meet people’s needs. Staff liaised with healthcare professionals to obtain advice about how to support people with their healthcare needs. Staff were implementing care practices that reflected the advice received. For example people were assisted at mealtimes using the advice given by speech and language and occupational therapists.

People were assisted to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their individual needs and preferences. People were cared for in line with the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). ‘Best interest meetings’ were held as required by the MCA in situations when people could not give consent, for example, for a medical procedure.

People were treated in a caring manner and with regard for their dignity and individuality. Staff were attentive to people’s non-verbal communication and provided care that took account of their individual needs and preferences. Specialist equipment was provided when appropriate. Adaptations to the building were made to meet particular needs. These included sensory aids to assist people with visual impairments to get around the home and equipment designed to help people with mobility needs.

There were systems to ensure the quality of the service provided was checked regularly and action was taken if necessary to ensure suitable standards of care. Appropriate action was taken in response to incidents with a view to preventing recurrence.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people as the people using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences.

We observed how people with risks associated with eating and drinking had their safety promoted. Staff felt more confident in their roles, they had received role related training and followed recommendations made by health professionals to support people with remaining safe.

Staff had extensive input from health and social care professionals and were supported by management in their personal and professional development. Practices were monitored closely to ensure they followed recommendations made by health professionals.

People were treated with warmth and respect by staff. We observed that staff supported people needing assistance to transfer safely and ensured their modesty and dignity was promoted.

We met all of the people living at the service, they were unable to give their views due to the nature of their disabilities. We observed practice during our visit and contacted professionals with an involvement in the service. We observed that people’s privacy and dignity were respected and the interactions between staff and people were kindly and patient.

People were supported to follow activities in the community and at home. There was consideration of people's cultural and religious needs.

We found that improvements had been made in response to concerns raised about people's care although there remained some aspects where there was further work to adequately meet the standards required. For example one person's weight was monitored with insufficient regularity and so changes could not be responded to quickly.

Important events affecting people's welfare had not been reported to the Care Quality Commission although the provider was required to do so. .

Some records were inadequately maintained and this meant that effective monitoring of people's needs could not be carried out.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. The people using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences.

We observed people who live at the home and saw that they were treated with warmth and respect by staff. They were relaxed with staff and in their environment.