Summerwood offers accommodation and personal care for up to eight people living with a learning disability, autism or mental health needs.

The inspection was unannounced and was carried out on 13 and 19 June 2017 by one inspector.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. 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 home is run.

There was a positive, can do culture within the home, led by the registered manager’s excellent example. This was consistently commented on by relatives and health and care professionals who told us that the staff were extremely responsive and provided personalised support that met people’s complex needs. Staff were exceptionally positive about working at Summerwood and felt very well supported by the registered manager who they said provided clear and strong leadership and direction. Staff told us they learnt a lot from the registered manager’s example and felt listened to and involved in the development of the service.

Staff were skilled in promoting people’s independence and found creative ways to communicate which ensured people felt valued and listened to. Relatives and health and care professionals consistently told us the staff found appropriate ways to explain things in a way people understood. For example, the use of PECS (picture cards) and ‘Now and next’ books which put events or activities into sequence to help prepare people for what to expect during the day.

Staff understood the importance of empowering people to make choices and take control of their lives which had a positive impact on people’s behaviours that challenged themselves and others. There was an excellent focus of person centred support. Staff were exceptionally committed and determined in finding ways to help people learn about and understand aspects of daily life, such as money and activities, which would enable them to have more independence, increase self-esteem and achieve excellent outcomes.

Detailed initial assessments and complex, multi-disciplinary transition periods were undertaken with people by staff, health and care professionals and families before people moved into the home to ensure their needs could be met. Solution focussed planning enabled the registered manager to support people whose previous placements had been unsuccessful.

People received person centred, individualised support that enabled them to achieve excellent outcomes and increase their self-esteem. People were encouraged to take part in a wide choice of activities, both at home and in the community, which increased their skills and independence. People were also supported to be involved in their local community where relationships and opportunities were pro-actively sought, such as an election workshop.

Staff were extremely kind and caring, treated people with dignity and respect and ensured their privacy was maintained. The registered manager had restructured the home to meet the changing needs of a person who could no longer use their upstairs bedroom. Their commitment to enabling the person to remain at the home was greatly valued by the person’s relatives.

The provider had joined ‘John’s Campaign’ a national initiative to promote positive relationships between care homes and families. People were encouraged and supported by staff who were committed to helping them maintain relationships with family and friends and visitors were welcome at any time. Families felt valued and welcomed the kindness and care shown to them as well as their loved ones.

Robust record keeping enabled staff and health professionals to monitor the quality and effectiveness of people’s care and support. Health professionals commented extremely positively on the quality of reports provi

We inspected Summerwood to check that the provider had met the standards required. This was the first inspection since Summerwood opened in May 2013. Not everyone who lived at the home was able to tell us verbally what they thought about living there. However, we were able to speak with two people who used the service and we observed how staff interacted with people. We spoke with four members of staff, including the registered manager. We gathered evidence against the outcomes we inspected to help answer our five key questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking to people who use the service, the staff supporting them and looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People we spoke with told us that they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard people they supported.

People told us that they were treated well by staff and that they felt listened to and their wishes respected.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints and concerns.

The registered manager supported staff to understand any triggers to people’s behaviour that may have presented a risk to themselves and others. Risk assessments had been completed to guide staff in managing and minimising risks to people.

Is the service effective?

People’s health care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their care plans. Specialist input, such as occupational health, was provided to support the planning and delivery of people’s care.

People’s care plans and risk assessments were updated to reflect people’s changing needs. People told us that they achieved their goals at Summerwood, such as completing a college course.

Is the service caring?

We spoke with two people being supported by the service and asked their opinions about the staff who supported them. Feedback was positive. One person told us that staff “Treat me well” and another said “Staff always help me.”

We observed that staff spoke to people with kindness and respect. It was clear that staff knew people well and responded to them positively when supporting them.

Is the service responsive?

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. We saw that the service had received one complaint and this had been investigated and responded to in line with the complaints policy.

The service worked well with other agencies and services, such as care management and GPs, to ensure that people received appropriate care and support.

We saw that when people’s needs changed, the service responded in a timely way and communicated this to staff and other agencies on a need to know basis.

Is the service well led?

The service has a quality assurance system and records showed that any identified issues, or opportunities for improvement, were addressed promptly.

Staff meetings took place which enabled staff to discuss and plan improvements within the service.

The registered manager and senior staff held supervision meetings with care staff to identify training needs and monitor staff performance. Staff told us that they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They told us that they received training which supported them to carry out their roles.

Summerwood is a small residential home for up to eight people with a learning disability and autism. The home has bedrooms on the ground and first floor. There are two larger rooms on the top floor which provide more self-contained accommodation. There is a small, enclosed garden surrounding the house which provides facilities for growing vegetables, playing games and exercising on a trampoline.

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.

The registered manager was liked and respected by people, staff and relatives. There was good morale amongst staff who worked as a team in an open and transparent culture. Staff felt respected and listened to by the registered manager. Regular staff meetings meant that staff were involved in the development of future plans. There was a positive and caring atmosphere in the home and effective and responsive planning and delivery of care and support.

Staff had received safeguarding training. They told us they understood how to recognise the signs of abuse and knew how to report their concerns if they had any. There was a safeguarding policy in place and relevant telephone numbers were displayed in the registered manager’s office. Relatives told us their relative felt safe and people behaved in a way which indicated they felt safe.

Risks had been appropriately identified and addressed in relation to people’s specific needs. Staff were aware of people’s individual risk assessments and knew how to mitigate the risks.

Medicines were stored safely and administered by staff who had been trained to do so. There were procedures in place to ensure the safe handling and administration of medication.

People were asked for their consent before care or support was provided and where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This meant that people’s mental capacity was assessed and decisions were made in their best interest involving relevant people. The registered manager was aware of his responsibilities under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and had made appropriate applications for people using the service.

Relatives told us they were very happy and that staff understood people’s preferences and knew how to interact and communicate with them. People behaved in a way which showed they felt supported and happy. Dietary preferences were encouraged and supported by staff, ensuring people felt comfortable and safe in their own home.

Care plans were detailed and included a range of documents covering every aspect of a person’s care and support. The care plans were used in conjunction with person centred planning ensuring that people’s wishes and skills were recorded along with their support needs. We saw this reflected in the support observed during the visit. There was evidence in care plans that the home had responded to behavioural and health needs and this had led to positive outcomes for people.

Systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. Regular checks were carried out in relation to the environment and equipment, and procedures were in place to report any defects. Learning took place from incidents and accidents which were recorded, investigated and action taken to minimise the risk of re-occurrence.