Park View

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to nine people and nine people were using the service at the time of the inspection. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff also wore their own clothing to avoid wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service used some restrictive intervention practices as a last resort, in a person-centred way, in line with positive behaviour support principles. We discussed with the management team about introducing a plan to demonstrate how they are aiming to reduce the use of restrictive interventions within the service.

Elements of the staff recruitment process had not been robust. There were enough staff to support people and people told us they felt safe living at Park View. Risk assessments were in place for areas of identified risk, but recognised assessment were not always used. Staff were aware of how to support people when they were experiencing periods of distress or anxiety. Professionals fed back that staff knowledge could be further developed in this area. People received their medicines as required and staff understood what actions to take if they thought somebody was at risk of abuse.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff understood the importance of seeking people's consent.

We made a recommendation about the application of the Mental Capacity Act, ensuring that capacity assessments were completed when people had restrictions in place.

Staff received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to support people. Staff received regular 'one to ones' and had annual appraisals of their performance. These aided staff development and practice in how they supported people. The staff team had close links with health and social care professionals and sought their input and advice to help achieve good outcomes for people.

Staff were patient and caring in their approach towards people. People were relaxed with staff and felt confident in asking for their support. Staff were mindful to respect people's privacy and promote their dignity. People were encouraged and supported to make their own day to day decisions.

Detailed, person-centred care plans were in place which provided clear information about people, their histories and needs. People and their representatives were encouraged to be involved in reviews of their support. Activities were arranged on a group or one to one basis, according to the person's preferences. Staff understood how people communicated and information was available in a variety of different formats, according to people's needs.

People, their relatives and staff felt confident to approach the management team with any concerns. The management team were visible and worked alongside staff in supporting people. A series of audits and checks were completed to monitor the quality and safety of the service. People's feedback was sought to aid in the development of the service.