Barnford House

At the last inspection on 20 January 2016 this service was rated good in all five key questions, and before that the home has a history of compliance with legal requirements. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

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. People living at Brookfields could live a life as fully as they were able in a domestic styled homely environment that had been created to meet their needs.

On the day of our inspection visit there was a registered manager in post. 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 was run.

The service was well led. There was a person-centred ethos which meant that people were empowered to have some choice and control over their lives. The registered manager provided stable leadership and clear direction to the staff team and staff felt supported.

There were effective systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided that placed an emphasis on the quality of people's lives. These systems were used to continue to drive improvements in the service and the care people received.

Brookfield's provided person-centred care. We saw that people and relatives were treated with kindness by a staff team. Staff supported people with dignity, and had developed some positive relationships with people that were based on respect and trust.

People could maintain relationships with people who were important to them. Relatives we spoke with felt their views and opinions about their loved one's care were listened to so that they felt involved in their loved one's care.

Staff sought consent from people before caring for them and they clearly understood and followed the

principles of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA). Where people were deprived of their liberty, processes had been followed to ensure that this was done lawfully. Where medicines were given covertly the best interests processes hadn't been followed. Staff understood people's unique communication styles and ensured that the views of people with communication difficulties were listened to and acted upon.

People were protected from the risk of harm because there were robust processes to ensure their safety. Staff all knew and understood their responsibilities in relation to protecting people from abuse and had received the training they needed to do this. People were protected from harm because the risks to their safety were clearly identified and measures in place to reduce these risks.

People were supported by enough well trained and competent staff who knew people well. The registered manager followed robust recruitment checks to ensure that staff employed were suitable to support people using the service with all aspects of their care. People's medicines were managed safely and people were protected from the risk of infection.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink, to manage their health needs and saw health professionals regularly as needed. Staff implemented the guidance that was provided by health care professionals to support people to meet their health needs and stay well.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found