Valley View Care Home has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. Registering the Right Support CQC policy.

Valley View Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Valley View Care Home accommodates to up to eight people over the age of 18 years, male and female, with learning disabilities, sensory impairments and physical disabilities in a single story building. There were six people living in the home at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

At our last inspection we rated the service good overall and outstanding in the responsive domain. At this inspection we found the evidence supported a rating of good in responsive and good overall. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People were protected from unnecessary harm because staff knew how to recognise abuse and understood how to report their concerns. People’s risks associated with their care were identified, assessed and managed to keep them safe.

Staff understood the importance of gaining consent from people and the actions they should take when people were unable to make decisions for themselves. People were provided with a choice of suitable food and were encouraged to take adequate fluids to support their health. People’s health and wellbeing needs were regularly monitored and when necessary people received additional support from health care professionals.

People were treated kindly by staff and their rights to privacy and dignity were recognised and maintained. Staff recognised people’s individuality and provided care which met their preferences. People were encouraged and supported to maintain the relationships which were important to them.

Relatives and staff felt the service was well managed by the provider and registered manager. The registered manager listened to people’s opinions. Audits and checks were in place to monitor the quality of the service and make improvements where needed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

We inspected this service on 4 December 2015. This was an unannounced inspection and the inspection was carried out by one inspector. Our last inspection took place in December 2013 and at that time we found the provider was meeting the regulations we looked at.

The service was registered to provide accommodation for up to eight people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection eight people were using the service.

The service 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.

People were protected from the risks of abuse because staff understood where harm may be caused and took action when people were at risk of harm. People were cared for by staff that had the knowledge and skills required to support them. Training was creatively designed with the support of family members to help to understand the complex needs of people who used the service. The staff looked at innovative ways to help people to express themselves and to understand how they communicated.

Creative ways were used to enable the people who used the service to achieve fulfilling lives. Staffing was organised flexibly to enable people to be involved with activities and do the things they enjoyed. People had opportunities to be involved with a variety of activities and staff were innovative when considering what people would like to be involved with.

People chose how to spend their time and were helped to make decisions which were in their best interests. Where people’s liberty was restricted, this had been done lawfully to safeguard them. People had access to health care and were supported to attend healthcare appointments when they needed it. Where important treatments were needed the staff worked with health care professionals so people were helped to make decisions whether to proceed with any treatment that was in their best interests.

People were supported to eat and drink the food they liked and given the time they needed to eat. A variety of food was offered and meal times were viewed as a social event and staff made the experience pleasurable.

People were treated with dignity and respect and the staff were kind and caring. Staff recognised where people may be unhappy and helped people to raise concerns they may have to make improvements. Staff recognised people’s diverse needs and were committed to meeting these needs and ensuring their unique rights were upheld.

People and staff were encouraged and supported to provide feedback on the service. There were systems in place to review the quality of the service provided and the provider was committed to developing and improving the service.

Eight people were living at Valleyview when we visited. People were unable to verbally communicate their experiences of care to us, but appeared happy and comfortable with the support provided to them.

The relationship between staff and the people using the service was positive and staff demonstrated they were able to support people in a safe way which met their needs and preferences.

Recent satisfaction questionnaires seen from people’s family members confirmed they were happy with the support provided to their relatives. Recent satisfaction questionnaires from external professionals who supported people using the service were also positive, one person had written ‘Valleyview continue to offer a high quality person centred, compassionate service for clients with learning disabilities and complex needs.’

The meals available were based on people’s dietary requirements and preferences. People’s nutritional needs were monitored appropriately and professional advice and guidance was sought when needed.

People received their medication as prescribed and staff had undertaken the appropriate training to ensure this was done in a safe way.

Records seen demonstrated that robust recruitment practices were followed to ensure the staff employed were suitable to work with the people using the service.

Systems were in place to monitor the care and services provided, and to identify and manage risks to ensure the service was run safely.

There were seven people living at Valleyview when we visited. Due to people’s communication skills they were unable to communicate their experiences of care to us, but did appear happy and comfortable with the support provided to them.

People’s family members we spoke with were very positive about the service, comments included, “they treat everyone as an individual. I am more than happy with the support my relative gets.” And “the staff are wonderful, couldn’t wish for better care for my relative.”

People’s method of communication was recorded in their support plans. This ensured staff could support people according to their preference and choice.

The staff team were familiar with people’s care needs and how to support them. People’s family members told us the staff contacted them if there were any issues or concerns with their relative’s health. Family members confirmed that they were involved in the development and review of their support package. One person told us, “They involve me in all decisions about my relatives care.”

Staff training records demonstrated that staff were provided with all areas of mandatory training and training specific to the needs of the people using the service. The records seen confirmed that updates were provided as required.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the care and services provided, and to identify and manage risks to ensure the service was run safely.

People using the service were unable to communicate with us verbally but the relatives we spoke with made many positive comments. They described the service as “absolutely brilliant”, said it “could not be outclassed” and that it was a “good home”. They described staff as “kind”, “friendly” and like “angels”.

Visiting professionals also praised the service saying it did “very, very well” and that staff were “very knowledgeable”.