Lowlands

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. One person had a Court of Protection in place and staff were aware of what this meant. People were asked for consent before care was offered. Peoples confidential information was kept secure. Staff worked closely with other professionals to support people using the service. Staff had received an induction and training was ongoing. Staff reported, and records confirmed regular supervision and appraisals were taking place.

People told us they were treated with kindness and were positive about the staff's attitude. People said, "I couldn't ask for better staff." People were involved in their care plans and review meetings where they wanted to be. Advocacy services were highlighted in homes and people's privacy, dignity and independence were supported by the service.

People received person centred care and support from staff who knew people well. People's communication needs had been assessed and staff knew how best to communicate to people. People were involved in social and leisure time and there was a range of activities available. People knew who to raise a concern and the service had policies and procedure in place.

The service had an experienced registered manager in post and there was a clear organisational structure. Audits were taking place in a variety of different areas to support the quality of the service. The service

engaged with people and staff through regular house meeting, questionnaires and team meetings. We saw partnership working with health and social care professionals which supported peoples needs.