SENSE - 38 Redgate Court

The 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 living in the home can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

SENSE – 38 Redgate Court is registered to accommodate up to six people with physical disabilities and learning disabilities who may also have difficulties with hearing and seeing. The accommodation is on two floors with no passenger lift only stair access. There are six single bedrooms, two on the ground floor with a toilet and bathroom and four on the first floor with a bathroom and shower room.

At our last inspection in March 2016 we rated the home good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and 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 home has not changed since our last inspection.

This inspection was completed on 10 July 2018 and there were six people living in the home at the time of the inspection.

A registered manager was not in post. A manager was in situ and was, in the registered managers absence, responsible for the day-to-day running of the service. The manager told us they would be applying to CQC to become registered. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. 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 home is run.

The registered manager had left on 6 July 2018. The provider had appointed a new manager (the previous deputy) who began on 9 July 2018. The manager in SENSE – 38 Redgate Court understood their responsibilities in relation to notifying CQC of certain events that happened at the home.

People were safe because potential risks to people had been recognised and information on how to minimise risks had been recorded as guidance for staff to follow. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities in relation to keeping people safe from harm and abuse. Medicines were managed safely. There were enough staff of the right skill mix on duty to meet people's support needs.

People received an effective service because their needs were met by staff who were well trained and

supported to do their job. People were supported to have choice and control of their lives. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the home supported this practice. People's nutritional needs were met by staff who knew each person's needs well. People's health and wellbeing was maintained and they had access to a range of health and social care professionals.

People received good care because staff treated people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People had choices in all aspects of their daily lives and were able to continue with interests, activities and friendships outside the home. Staff ensured people remained as independent as possible.

People received a service that was responsive. People, their relatives and advocates (where appropriate) were involved in their personalised support plans and reviews. The information about them in relation to their care and support was up to date.

People were encouraged to take part in a range of activities that they enjoyed and were the choice of the person at that time. This helped promote social inclusion. Information was in place to support people with end of life care should this ever be needed.

People had received a service that was well led. Quality assurance systems were used to check that the staff provided quality care and the manager made improvements where necessary. People were encouraged to share their views about the quality of the service provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found