You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 26 October 2019

About the service

New Ridley Road is two adjoining purpose built bungalows, therefore bigger than most domestic style properties, providing support to people living with a learning disability and/or autism and physical disabilities. It was registered to support up to nine people. Nine people were using the service at the time of inspection. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the use of personalisation in people's own rooms and several areas for communal use. Staff supporting people did not wear a uniform or any identifying clothing that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people, and people were supported to have access to local community facilities and services.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

We found staff had recorded two accidents in daily records but had not completed accident forms. This meant the registered manager could not be sure that their checks on trends for accident and incidents were correct. The registered manager reviewed this and addressed this with the staff team to ensure the correct procedure was followed.

Medicines were stored safely and staff were trained to administer them correctly. We found records relating to 'as and when required' medicines and topical creams needed to be improved and the registered manager actioned this immediately.

Staff knew people well and supported people in line with the person’s preferences and wishes.

Staffing levels enabled people’s needs to be met safely, and ensured people received consistent and reliable support. Most staff had worked at the service for over five years and relatives we spoke with said they were caring and very welcoming.

Staff were recruited safely and received appropriate training and support to enable them to carry out their role effectively. 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.

People were supported to access healthcare services if needed. People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and staff were trained to support people who had different dietary needs.

Interactions we saw between people and the staff team were positive. We saw people given immediate reassurance when they became anxious or distressed.

Care plans were person centred and people were involved in their reviews where they were able. The service actively supported people to engage with advocacy services and one person had ongoing advocacy support they benefitted from.

People were supported to engage in activities they enjoyed and we saw the service promoted people accessing local community facilities and supporting them to go on trips. People and their relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint.

Systems to monitor the quality of the care provided were effective. The staff team told us they were very well supported by the registered manager. We discussed the high level of recording regarding checks on the cleanliness of the home. We felt the number of checks completed was excessive and not in line with the type of community home provided. Staff also said they felt these checks were a burden. The registered manager agreed to review these checks and lessen the burden

Inspection areas



Updated 26 October 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 26 October 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 26 October 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 26 October 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 26 October 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.