Foresight Residential Limited - 66 Leeds Road

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 10 people. 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, cameras or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People told us they felt safe and secure within the home and systems in place supported their safety. Risks to people's health and safety were assessed and mitigated and positive risks were taken to help ensure people accessed the community. Medicines were managed in a safe and proper way. There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received a high level of support. Incidents were recorded and lessons learnt when things went wrong.

People received effective care that met their needs. People had a good choice of food and nutritional needs were met. The service liaised with the range of health professionals to help ensure needs were met. 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. The premises were appropriately adapted to meet people's individual needs.

Staff were kind and caring and treated people well. People had influence on their care and how the service was run. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped promote their independence.

People's care needs were assessed, and a range of care plans put in place which were regularly updated. These were clear and person-centred. The service was meeting the requirements of the accessible information standard, ensuring the needs of those with communication difficulties were met. Care plans needed more information recording about how the service helped people to maintain relationships. We have made a recommendation relating to this.

There was an open and inclusive culture within the home. People and staff praised the management team and said they felt able to approach and discuss issues with them. A range of audits and checks were undertaken, and these had been improved since the last inspection. Provider visits were however still inconsistent. We have made a recommendation regarding this.