This comprehensive inspection took place on 17 November 2016 and was unannounced.

The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to five adults who have needs arising from learning disabilities and/or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of inspection, there were five people living at the home.

The service was previously inspected in April 2013 when the service was found compliant with all the regulations inspected.

Care was provided in a purpose-built single storey home set in grounds on the outskirts of Aldershot. The property was owned and maintained by a landlord who leased the home to United Response.

There was a registered manager running the service. 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 home had a happy, friendly feel with staff and people interacting with humour. There were enough staff to support people safely. People were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff showed kindness and care to people. Staff received training to ensure they had the necessary knowledge and skills to carry out their role. Staff were also supervised and appraised to support them in their role on a regular basis.

The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities in terms of safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse. They also understood their role in ensuring they worked within the framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Care plans described people’s care and support needs. They were reviewed on a regular basis and also when changes to a person were identified. Health and social care professionals were involved to support people’s care and health needs. These included people’s GP, dentist, as well as specialist services such as incontinence advisors. People were supported to have a healthy diet and stay hydrated. Staff prepared meals which people enjoyed and which met their dietary needs, including food intolerances.

Staff administered, recorded and stored people’s medicines safely. Individual risks had been assessed and people were supported to be as independent as possible taking these into account.

The home was well run by the registered manager and her deputy who knew people and staff well. Audits and checks were carried out to ensure the quality of the service provided. Senior managers visited the home regularly to undertake checks on the environment and people’s care. Where issues were identified, actions were taken to address these. This included working with the landlord on issues relating to the home.

During the inspection we were unable to speak with people in a meaningful way, due to their verbal communication difficulties. We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. We saw people responded positively to staff.

Following the visit we spoke with two people's relatives. They told us their relatives were looked after well. One relative said "It is a great place for my relative. He is well looked after" Another relative said "I visit the home regularly, the staff are lovely and very caring. My relative is treated with dignity and respect and he often goes out and about with staff". Local authority professionals told us the staff were proactive regarding identifying people's changing care needs and involved them as required. One care manager told us "I have no worries about the care provided at the home" Another care manager told us "We don't have a lot of communication with the home, but if necessary they will contact us".

People were treated respectfully and their views were taken in to account by staff. Staff understood the signs of abuse and were confident about raising their concerns with the appropriate people.

Staff recruitment practices and procedures were robust and ensured that people were cared for by staff that were fit to do their jobs. Records about, care treatment and support were clear factual and accurate and maintained the dignity and confidentiality of the people who used the service.

On the day of the inspection all of the people living at the home were present; however we were unable to speak with them in a meaningful way, due to verbal communication difficulties.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. We also observed the care being given and the interactions between the people who use the service and the staff. We saw people responded positively to staff.

In addition we reviewed the records, and in particular those where individuals had recorded their wishes and opinions of the service.

Following the visit we spoke with three people's representatives. They told us their relatives were looked after well. One representative said "staff are brilliant; they have worked at the home a long time". Another representative said " Ash Vale is a very happy situation for my relative"

People using the service have special communication needs. Because we were not familiar with their individual methods of communication we were unable to obtain their views about the home.