Whiteoak provides a respite service for people with learning disabilities. It can accommodate up to 17 people at any one time. Accommodation consists of a single storey building and a separate self-contained bungalow. At the time of the inspection, approximately 80 people were regularly using the respite service; this could be for one night or for longer stays of a few weeks. Admissions to the service were currently reduced due to significant building work which was due for completion in Summer 2017. On the morning of the inspection 9 people were staying at the service.

A long established registered manager was in place. 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 the last inspection in August 2014 we found the service delivered high quality care and rated the service as ‘Good.’ This inspection took place between 30 January 2017 and 1 February 2017 and was unannounced and we found the quality of the service had been maintained.

Due to people’s complex needs we were unable to ask them in detail about their care experiences. We spent time observing care and support and spoke with relatives of people who used the service. Relatives told us the service provided good quality care and that their relatives were happy to use the service.

We found people were safe from abuse. Staff understood safeguarding and we saw safeguarding procedures had been followed to help keep people safe. Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and clear, person centred plans of care put in place which were well understood by staff.

Medicines were managed safely, with people’s medicines checked carefully by staff before support was provided. The decision to administration medicines in a covert or hidden way was done as part of a best interest process including a multidisciplinary team, however theses processes had not always been subject to regular review. We have made a recommendation about the management of covert medicines.

There were enough staff deployed to ensure people were safe, appropriately supervised and provided with social opportunities. Staff were carefully recruited to ensure they were of suitable character to work with people with learning disabilities.

The premises was safely managed. Whilst the service was undergoing extensive building work, this was being managed in a careful way with admissions restricted to ensure people were supported in a safe way with minimal distress.

Staff received training relevant to their role working with people with learning disabilities. This included training in autism, epilepsy and positive behaviour support. Training was largely up-to-date and staff demonstrated a good knowledge of the people and topics we asked them about.

The service was compliant with the legal framework of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were involved in decisions about their care and support and best interest processes were followed where people lacked capacity.

The service assessed people’s healthcare needs and put in place appropriate plans of care. The service was good at liaising with external health professionals to access specialist knowledge.

People were treated fairly, with dignity and respect by the service. Staff were warm and kind with people. Staff knew people well and their individual likes and preferences.

Care and support was person centred, with adjustments made to the service to meet people’s individual needs taking into consideration their varied cultural and religious backgrounds.

People’s care needs were assessed and appropriate plans of care put in place, although some of these required updating, this had been recognised by the service

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014. The inspection was unannounced. At the last inspection in August 2013 the home met all the national standards that we looked at.

Whiteoak provides a respite service for up to 17 people at any one time, accommodated in a single storey building and a separate self-contained bungalow. At the time of the inspection 74 people were regularly using the respite service; this could be for one night or for longer stays of a few weeks. The services cares for people with learning disabilities.

A registered manager was in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

Feedback regarding the quality of the service was excellent from people, their relatives, and care professionals. They all said the service had an excellent approach to safety and dealt with issues appropriately. Systems were in place to identify and manage risk and the service was committed to continuous improvements to safety.

Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and how to ensure the rights of people with limited mental capacity to make decisions were respected. We found the location to be meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People spoke positively about the food and we found a choice of meals was on offer based on people’s preferences. People’s healthcare needs were met and care professionals reported strong links with the service.

People and their relatives reported staff were very caring and respectful and had the time to develop meaningful relationships with them. This was confirmed during our observations on the day of the inspection, and through discussions with staff. Dignity, respect and equality were effectively promoted throughout the organisation and the care provided was highly individualised.

People’s needs were regularly assessed and changes regularly made to their support plans. A range of activities were available for people to be involved in.

People, relatives and staff all spoke positively about the registered manager and said they were effective in dealing with any concerns. Systems were in place to continuously improve the quality of the service. This included taking action following incidents, complaints and audits.

During the inspection we observed care in the communal areas of the home, spoke with three relatives of people who used the service and spoke with four members of staff.

All three relatives said they had no concerns and thought their relatives received good quality care. One person told us “It is a good service, they really understand his needs.” Another person told us “the care is excellent.”

We found the provider had systems in place to ensure valid consent was sought from people who used the service. Where this was not possible, processes were in place which ensured decisions were made in people’s best interests.

We found staff displayed a caring attitude towards people in the home and people's care and welfare needs were properly assessed.

We found the home maintained a clean and hygienic environment and had suitable systems in place to reduce the risk of infection.

We saw evidence staff were well supported by the management structure in the carrying out of their duties and were provided with appropriate training and supervision.

We found the provider had an appropriate complaints system in place which ensured all complaints were recorded and fully investigated.