Woodcote is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care service 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.

Woodcote provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people who have learning disabilities and some associated physical and/or sensory disabilities. There were six people using the service at the time of inspection. The building was situated over two floors, with people’s bedrooms located on the second floor. Some people had their own bathrooms attached to their bedrooms and there were communal facilities for those that did not. There was a kitchen, dining-room, large lounge and sensory room for people to relax in. People also had access to a large patio area and three acres of land at the back of the property. This included a paddock, tennis courts and a lake.

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.

We observed staff offering people choices and they had a good understanding of how to support those who lacked capacity to make decisions. However, documentation that recorded people’s understanding of specific decisions did not reflect the person’s views or those that knew them well. We have made a recommendation regarding this.

Regular quality audits were completed by the registered manager, deputy manager, service manager and director. However, a number of shortfalls were found within record keeping which demonstrated current auditing processes needed to be developed. Staff had a thorough knowledge of people and their support needs, which meant where shortfalls were identified, there was limited impact to people. Documentation that was missing, incomplete or due for review, was not always identified for example, people’s evacuation plans lacked person centred information in how to support them during an emergency. There were also inconsistencies within staff documentation, particularly with regard to training. Staff and relatives told us they completed surveys regularly to express their views on the service, however there was a lack of evidence to demonstrate information being analysed and feedback given.

People were safe. Staff understood how to protect people against harm and there were suitable levels of staff available to ensure people’s needs could be met at any time. Staff were recruited safely and appropriate background checks were made to ensure their character and skills were suitable to support people. There were individualised risk assessments for people and the environment and building they lived in. This included guidance for supporting people with behaviours that challenged. Incidents were investigated within relevant timescales and appropriate actions taken to ensure they did not happen again. Medicines were managed safely. People were supported by staff that were trained in administering medicines.

Staff told us they received a wide range of training to ensure they could support people safely. They spoke highly of their induction into the home that included shadowing experienced staff and developing a thorough knowledge of people and their routines. Staff also benefited from taking part in regular supervision and appraisal to help them develop their skills and knowledge. Staff felt support

This inspection took place on 18 June 2015 and was unannounced.

Woodcote is a privately owned residential care home providing care and en-suite accommodation for up to six people with a learning disability. They specialise in autism, challenging behaviour, epilepsy, hearing and speech impairment. Five people lived in the home at the time of our inspection. Most of the people living in the service were able to express themselves verbally, others used body language.

There was not a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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 said they felt safe living in the home and relatives told us that their family members received safe care. Staff understood how to appropriately report and respond to any allegations of abuse.

Safe recruitment procedures ensured that staff were suitable to work with people. Staffing levels were based on people’s needs and promoted their safety and wellbeing.

People had individual risk assessments for all areas of their living activities. These were updated or reviewed when people’s needs changed.

Medicines were stored and administered safely so that people received the medicines they needed. People who wanted to and had been assessed as safe to do so managed parts of their own medicine administration and recording to develop their independence.

People received medical assistance from healthcare professionals including district nurses, opticians, chiropodists and their GP.

Staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to ensure they could meet people’s complex needs. Staff had received the training they needed to enable them to carry out their roles effectively.

We observed that staff sought people’s consent before providing care and support. Staff and management understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Assessments of people’s capacity to make decisions had been carried out in line with the MCA requirements.

Staff were respectful and caring in their approach. People were given the support they needed to ensure they had meaningful occupation and their social needs were met. People’s choices were respected and staff supported people to take part in activities that suited their individuality.

Staff responded to people’s behaviours that challenged with insight, patience and care. People’s communication needs were respected and met to ensure they could express themselves and be understood.

People were supported and encouraged to maintain links with family and friends.

There was a complaints procedure in place. Information about how to complain was displayed in the entrance lobby in pictorial format so that people knew how to make a complaint.

People and their relatives felt the home was well run and were confident they could raise concerns if they had any. There were systems to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the services provided and to recognise when improvements were needed and to act on these.

At our last inspection in May 2013 no concerns were found.

We spoke with the manager, three members of staff, two people who used the service and two visitors. We consulted four care plans, the service's policies and three staff files. We inspected the premises,observed meal preparation and lunch being served.

We found that care plans were comprehensive and reflected people's individual needs. The staff delivered the care and treatment that was recommended in the care plans. We saw that Woodcote had arrangements in place, and staff were trained appropriately to deal with foreseeable emergencies.

We saw that the food provided was well balanced, in sufficient quantity and of a high standard. One person told us, "The food is good, I like it, I didn't use to eat much but I am better now. I like baking cakes and we do biscuits too".

We found that Woodcote had a policy to safeguard vulnerable adults and children and were following correct procedures should they have concerns.

We saw that the premises were clean and welcoming. The staff ensured that risks of infection were minimised, they routinely cleaned and disinfected the premises. We saw that scheduled cleaning rotas were being followed. One person who used the service told us, "I change my bed with my keyworker every week and we clean my room together, I like cleaning".

We found that there was a clear recruitment procedure to ensure that staff were skilled and qualified to carry out their roles effectively.

The purpose of this visit was to review the steps taken by the provider to address shortfalls that were identified during the previous inspection undertaken on 22 February 2012.

We used this opportunity to talk with the residents who were keen to tell us how they spent their time and what activities they were involved with on a weekly basis. One person told us how she had now been enrolled into college and was starting a course on photography in September. She was very excited about this opportunity and showed us her photograph albums.

The manager confirmed that more staff had been recruited to enable residents more flexibility with activities. One resident said the additional staff now allowed her to go swimming with her boyfriend on a more regular basis. Another resident was able to communicate with us using British Sign Language (BSL) to explain how she was now attending a communications course run by the Deaf Club in Brighton. She also showed us how staff had helped her choose paint for her new bedroom and involved her in the decorating.

People told us that they had nice bedrooms and enjoyed going out. People said that they would like to do more activities outside the home. One person said that they would like to go to college. Another person told us that they were happy staying at the home and watching television. One person told us that they didn’t like some of the people they lived with.