4 Trinity Court

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.

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.

People's safety had been considered by the service, risk assessments both for care and the environment had been completed. These minimised the risk of harm to people. Staff had received training in how to protect people from abuse and guidance for reporting concerns was available.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Where required appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been submitted for authorisation. This protected people's human rights.

Support was offered to staff through training, supervision, appraisals and daily or monthly meetings. Staff told us they felt supported and appeared to be happy with their work. We found the provider needed to increase the availability of training so staff could complete this in a timely way. We have made a recommendation about this in the report.

Trained staff administered medicines. We observed there were sufficient numbers of trained and experienced staff to enable people to receive care when they needed it.

People told us the staff were caring, we observed positive and meaningful interactions between staff and people in the home. Systems were in place to ensure the risk of employing unsuitable staff was minimised.

People's healthcare needs were supported by the staff. We read documentation related to health appointments with external professionals to assist people with their mental and physical health needs.

Care plans documented people's preferred method of communication. People had access to the information they needed in a way they could understand it. People's relatives were encouraged, where appropriate, to be involved in the planning and monitoring of the care provided.

Activities were provided for people to participate in. Families and friends were encouraged and supported to maintain contact with people. This protected people from the risk of social isolation.

People were treated equally, regardless of their disability, gender, sexuality, religion, race or age in line with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010. People's chosen lifestyles were respected and where staff could offer support to people they did.

People's nutritional needs were reflected in care plans and we observed staff supporting people to ensure their health and wellbeing was maintained.

Care was provided to people in a way that protected their privacy and dignity. They were respected by staff and treated in a dignified manner. Staff were described as caring by people's relatives, the registered manager and staff were held in high regard and we received positive comments about the service they provided.

Steps had been taken by the registered manager to review the service, through discussions with staff and people's relatives, questionnaires and audits. Where appropriate, improvements had been made. This enabled the registered manager to keep an overview of the service and to drive forward improvements when needed.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found