78 Polwell Lane

This inspection took place on the 8 and 9 January 2018 and was unannounced. We had previously inspected this service in November 2015, at that inspection the service was rated 'Good'. We found that at this inspection the service had remained 'Good' but that there were areas where we saw continued improvement which we have rated as 'Outstanding.'

The was 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.

The service was committed to providing good care, which put people at the heart of everything. The registered manager led and inspired the staff to deliver person-centred care, which had achieved consistently good outcomes for people.

There was a very effective system of quality assurance led by the provider and registered manager that ensured people consistently received good care and support. People receiving care from 78 Polwell Lane had an enhanced sense of well-being and quality of life because staff worked innovatively to enable people to have meaningful experiences and to become active members of the local community.

Staff continuously ensured that people lived as fulfilled and enriched lives as possible. They respected people's individuality and enabled people to express their wishes and make choices for themselves. Positive therapeutic relationships had been developed and staff were proud of the support that they had provided to people and the positive outcomes they had observed.

People's health and well-being was monitored by staff and they were supported to access health professionals in a timely manner when they needed to. People were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink to maintain a balanced diet. People experienced caring relationships with staff and good interaction was evident.

Staff understood their responsibilities to safeguard people and knew how to respond if they had any concerns. Care plans contained risk assessments, which gave detailed instructions to staff as to how to mitigate risks; these enabled and empowered people to live as independent a life as possible safely.

Staff knew their responsibilities as defined by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). The provider was aware of how to make referrals if people lacked capacity to consent to aspects of their care and support and were being deprived of their liberty. People were supported to use communication aids and information was provided to people in an accessible format to enable them to make decisions about their care and support.

Staff demonstrated the provider's values of offering person centred care that respected people as individuals in all of their interactions with people. People's relatives and the professionals involved in people's care consistently told us that the service provided good care to people.

People could be assured that they would be supported by sufficient numbers of staff. Records showed that people received their care in the way they needed to maintain their safety.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found