The inspection took place on 11 January 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice because people and staff were often out in the local community and we wanted to make sure that they would be available.

Walby Hill (Adult Care Home) provides personal care and accommodation for up to seven people who have learning disabilities. There were seven people living at the service at the time of the inspection. We last inspected the service in December 2015 and found three breaches of the regulations. These related to the need for consent, safe care and treatment and good governance.

At this inspection we found that action had been taken and the provider was now meeting all the regulations we inspected.

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.

The premises were clean well maintained. A new bathroom had been fitted and a kitchen refurbishment was planned. Checks and tests had been carried out to ensure the building was safe.

People told us they felt safe. There were safeguarding policies and procedures in place. Staff told us that they had not seen anything that had concerned them. The local authority’s safeguarding adults team told us there were no safeguarding concerns regarding the service. Medicines were managed safely.

Safe recruitment procedures were followed including a Disclosure and Barring Service check (DBS) and references. There were sufficient staff on duty at the time of the inspection. Staff received appropriate training and support to enable them to care for people effectively.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) including the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. MCA is a law that protects and supports people who do not have ability to make their own decisions and to ensure decisions are made in their ‘best interests’ it also ensures unlawful restrictions are not placed on people in care homes and hospitals. The registered manager had submitted DoLS applications to the local authority for authorisation in line with legal requirements.

People were provided with support to meet their nutrition and hydration needs. We observed positive interactions between people and staff. Staff promoted people’s privacy and dignity.

People were supported to access the local community and maintain their hobbies and interests. A complaints procedure was in place.

An effective quality assurance system was now in place to ensure that people received safe, effective and responsive care which met their specific needs and preferences. The provider was meeting the conditions of their registration.

The inspection took place on 17 and 23 December 2015 and was announced. We gave the provider notice because people and staff were often out in the local community and we wanted to make sure that they would be available.

Walby Hill (Adult Care Home) provides care and support for people who have learning disabilities. There were seven people living at the service at the time of the inspection. The number of people the provider was registered to accommodate was being reviewed at the time of the inspection. We last inspected the service in April 2014 and found they were meeting all the regulations we inspected.

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.

We discovered some concerns with the condition of the premises. We noticed that the first floor windows had not been fitted with window restrictors. In addition, a wardrobe which was located at the top of the stairs had not been secured to the wall to prevent any accidents or incidents. A risk assessment had not been undertaken to assess these risks.

All providers of health and social care have to comply with the Code of Practice for health and social care on the prevention and control of infections, and related guidance. We found that criterion one of this code, which requires the provider to have systems to manage and monitor the prevention and control of infection was not being fully met.

Staff told us that they had to walk through the kitchen with soiled washing to access the laundry. This risk had not been assessed. There was no designated sluice facility or guidelines in place to ensure that staff followed correct procedures regarding the cleaning and disinfection of continence equipment to ensure that it was adequately cleaned.

People told us they felt safe. There were safeguarding policies and procedures in place. Staff told us that they had not seen anything that had concerned them. We found minor concerns with medicines management.

We spoke with one staff member who had been recruited in 2014. They told us that the correct recruitment procedures had been followed including a Disclosure and Barring Service check (DBS) and references. We found however, that the DBS had been obtained after the staff member had started work. The manager told us that the staff member had always shadowed an experienced member of staff and did not work alone. A risk assessment had not been completed to assess this risk or document the actions that had been put in place.

Following our inspection, the provider wrote to us and stated that an on line DBS adult first check had been obtained prior to the staff member starting work. A DBS adult first check will confirm if an applicant is on the barred list for working with adults; it is not a substitute for a full DBS certificate. The provider explained that two new people had moved into the service at short notice after the care home where they previously lived had closed. The provider stated that new staff had to be recruited in a timely manner to ensure people’s needs could be met.

There were sufficient staff on duty at the time of the inspection. Staff received appropriate training and support to enable them to care for people effectively.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) including the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. MCA is a law that protects and supports people who do not have ability to make their own decisions and to ensure decisions are made in their ‘best interests’ it also ensures unlawful restrictions are not placed on people in care homes and hospitals. The registered manag

Walby Hill is a converted house in the village of Rothbury for people with learning disabilities. Care and support is provided for up to six people. At the time of our inspection five people were living at the service.

During the inspection we worked with the registered manager who had been in post, managing the service, since December 2010.

Everyone we observed was relaxed and comfortable at Walby Hill. We saw that staff regularly engaged with people using the service and had a good rapport with everyone.

We saw that people were involved in making decisions about all areas of their care. We saw that people’s individual care files included appropriate risk assessments and care documentation. We noted that the service had documentation to support ‘positive risk taking’.

We noted that the community played a large role in the lives of people using the service. People went on trips with the over 60s group, they got the regular bus to Alnwick, visited the local café regularly and participated in a local activity centre. During our time at the home people were keen to tell us about all the activities they were involved in and the home displayed in communal areas a large number of items, such as sewing and pictures, that had been made by people using the service.

The staffing structure at Walby Hill was flexible and we saw that although a regular rota was in place for staff consistency, the numbers of staff on duty depended upon the activities and plans of the individuals using the service. We saw that where people were assisted by a staff member on visits out into the community they could pick which staff member went with them.

We saw that service had a strong management presence and this led to a positive culture. We were confident that all staff members were aware of their roles and responsibilities.

We spoke with people who used the service but their feedback did not relate to this standard.

At this inspection, we checked whether previous shortfalls in the provision of fire safety staff training had been addressed. These issues had been identified during our last inspection at the service on 14 June 2013. We found that improvements had been made and the risks associated with the lack of recent fire safety had been reduced.

All staff had received comprehensive training in this area. This helped ensure people were safe because staff were trained to respond to emergencies.

We saw that people were consulted about care and support and people's rights were protected.

We concluded that people's safety and welfare were protected by the way care was assessed, planned and delivered. People were protected from discrimination. One person said, "I like it here me."

Care was provided in safe and suitable surroundings.

Staff were supported through training and supervision to deliver care safely to people. However training with regard to fire safety was not up to date and this posed a safety risk for following emergency procedures in the event of fire.

Accurate records were maintained and securely stored so that people were protected against inappropriate care or treatment.

People told us they were happy with the care and support they received at Walby Hill. They confirmed they were given choices in life and staff supported them to take some risks and be independent.

People we spoke with said, "I like it here", "I have lived here a long time, it is my home" and "It is nice and I like the staff."

People said they could receive medical and specialist attention when they needed it and were helped to fulfil their social needs within the home and community. People we spoke with said, "I am very busy, look at the things I have been making at the local sewing club" and "This is my home and has been for many years." People told us their home was clean, comfortable and warm. They said, "I like my room; I have my things and love my big bed".

They said staff were kind and caring and seemed to be well trained. People confirmed they were given the opportunity to comment on the service, change routine or raise complaints. They said their visitors were made to feel welcome and information sharing was good.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at Walby Hill. One member of staff said, "I really enjoy my job, we work together as a team, always aiming for the best we can do for people who live here." People, their families and advocates were given the opportunity to comment on the service, change routine or raise complaints.

We found that the provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

People said the following things to us: "I am happy here". " I like it here." " I like my room." "I like to go to the shops." " I am settled in."