Dimensions 21 Searing Way

The inspection took place on 27 February 2018 and was unannounced. Which meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

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.

Policies, procedures and staff training were in place to protect people from avoidable harm and abuse. Staff had identified risks to people and these were managed safely. Recruitment processes were followed to ensure suitable staffing levels and the provider had thorough pre-employment checks in place to determine prospective candidates' character and skills. This was to ensure staff were suitable to support people with a learning disability. Where agency staff were used the provider ensured people received good consistency and continuity of care by deploying the same staff. Arrangements were in place to receive, record, store and handle medicines safely and securely.

People were cared for by staff who had received appropriate training, support and supervision in their role. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. People were supported to eat and drink sufficiently for their needs. Staff supported people to see a range of healthcare professionals in order to maintain good health and wellbeing.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, they cared about people. Staff supported people to make choices about their lives. Staff treated people with respect and upheld their dignity and human rights when delivering their care.

People had a comprehensive assessment of their support needs and guidelines were produced for staff about how to meet their individual needs and preferences. Support plans were reviewed with people and their families and relevant changes made where needed. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible. Activities that were appropriate to each person were offered and encouraged. Processes were in place to enable people to make complaints and these were responded to appropriately.

The service had clear and effective governance in place. The provider encouraged people, their families, staff and professionals to be actively involved in the development and continuous improvement of the home. The provider had robust quality assurance systems which were operated across all levels of the service. Staff had worked effectively in partnership with other agencies to promote positive outcomes for people.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

The five questions we ask about services and what we found