Moore Care (Registered) Limited, Woodsmoore

On the day of our inspection six people were using the service.

The care service had 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.

At our last inspection in May 2016 we rated the service 'good.' At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of 'good' overall but there had been a deterioration in safe which was rated as 'requires improvement.' This was predominantly in regard to infection, prevention and control. However, 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.

The service was rated 'requires improvement' for 'safe' at this inspection. The management of infection control was not always effective because the service was not kept clean or well-maintained to be able to be effectively cleaned. People received their prescribed medicines, however, we identified some minor issues that were addressed by the registered manager.

People continued to receive a safe service where they were protected from avoidable harm, discrimination and abuse. Risks associated with people's needs including the environment, had been assessed and planned for and these were monitored for any changes. People did not have any undue restrictions placed upon them. There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs and safe staff recruitment procedures were in place and used. Accidents and incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence.

People continued to receive an effective service. Staff received the training and support they required including specialist training to meet people's individual needs. People were supported with their nutritional needs. The staff worked well with external health care professionals, people were supported with their needs and accessed health services when required. 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. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People continued to receive care from staff who were kind, compassionate and treated them with dignity

and respected their privacy. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported, they understood people's needs, preferences, and what was important to them. People's independence was promoted.

People continued to receive a responsive service. People's needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person and or their relative where required. People received opportunities to pursue their interests and hobbies, and social activities were offered. There was a complaint procedure and action had been taken to learn and improve where this was possible.

There was a registered manager and they promoted an open and transparent and person-centred culture with adequate leadership. People were asked to share their feedback about the action was taken in response.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

The five questions we ask about services and what we found