Elmsmead

Elmsmead is a residential home for up to 12 people with learning disabilities, including autism. At the time of the inspection 10 people were living at the home. The home specialised in supporting people who may become challenging to themselves or others if their anxiety was heightened. There were bedrooms on both floors of the building and a range of communal spaces. Each bedroom was personalised by the person and no one shared although there was an option to share if people wanted to.

At our last inspection we rated the service 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 ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection. .

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated …

Since the last inspection the management and provider had worked hard to ensure there were continual improvements at the home. There had been redecoration and a reduction in incidents occurring at the home. People, relatives and staff were positive about the registered manager. The registered manager and provider continually monitored the quality of the service and made improvements in accordance with people's changing needs.

People received care from staff who knew them incredibly well. People were involved in decisions about their care and the staff continuously were finding ways to share the information with people. Feedback from people and relatives to the home informed us about how well cared for they felt.

Care and support was personalised to each person, which ensured they could make choices about their day to day lives in line with their needs, hobbies and interests. Information about people's preferences were gathered in detail by members of staff. Time was provided for new staff to learn about people's care through the care plans.

People were supported to have a dignified death and support was provided for those who lost people they lived with. People's privacy and dignity was respected by staff and their cultural or religious needs were valued. People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received.

The service was responsive to people's individual needs. Activities were personalised to each person's preferences and hobbies. Staffing levels reflected the ethos that all staff were encouraged to support people with activities and in all aspects of their care. There was a range of opportunities for people and their families to participate in.

There was a system in place to manage complaints and people felt listened to. Plans were in place to further develop opportunities to learn from people. The provider had developed ways of promoting employment for people. There were opportunities for people to drive improvements within the home.

There were suitable numbers of staff to meet people's needs and to spend time socialising with them. Interactions were kind and caring. Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People received their medicines safely. People were protected from abuse because staff understood how to keep them safe and were sure action would be taken if any concerns were raised.

The home continued to ensure people received effective care. People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. People who required special diets had their needs met and healthy eating was promoted. Staff had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support people. People told us their healthcare needs were met and staff supported them to attend appointments.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

The five questions we ask about services and what we found