This inspection took place on the 4 September 2015 and was unannounced.
26 St Marks Road is a residential care home for eight people with a range of needs including learning and physical disabilities, autism, acquired brain injuries, and associated complex healthcare needs. It is situated in Chaddesden close to Derby city centre. The home has eight ground floor bedrooms, all with en-suite facilities and ceiling hoists. There is a self-contained flat for people who are preparing for transition into supported living, a sensory room, hydro bath, shower room with a shower trolley, a large lounge, a kitchen, and a dining room. There is a large garden to the rear of the home. All areas of the home and garden are wheelchair-accessible.
At the time of this inspection there were seven people using the service.
The service had a registered manager. This 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.
Relatives told us they thought their family members were safe in the home and people using the service appeared relaxed and comfortable. Staff were trained in safeguarding and knew what to do if they were concerned about the welfare of any of the people they were supporting.
There were enough staff on duty to keep people safe and meet their needs. Staff had time to interact and socialise with people as well as providing practical support. Medicines were safely stored and administered in the way people wanted them.
The food served appeared wholesome and well-presented. People were offered a variety of dishes depending on their likes and dislikes. They were encouraged to eat unassisted where possible and to choose which food items they wanted.
People were assisted to access health care services and maintain good health. Staff responded promptly if a person appeared unwell or there were changes in their behaviours indicating they might be unwell. Staff had a good awareness of the complex healthcare needs of the people using the service.
The atmosphere in the home was lively and the staff and the people using the service got on well with each other. People using the service were encouraged to express their views and make decisions about all aspects of their lives. Staff used the service’s minibus to take people to visit their relatives and bring relatives to the home for visits if that was preferable.
Relatives told us staff treated the people using the service as unique individuals and were responsive to their needs. Staff provided a range of one to one and group activities for the people using the service. On the day we inspected two people went out with staff to a local park in the morning. In the afternoon five people played board games with staff.
The culture of the home was one of openness and inclusion. Relatives told us the registered manager and staff welcomed feedback on the service provided. The staff we spoke with said the home was a pleasant, happy place to work and the registered manager was supportive of both themselves and the people using the service.
The registered manager and operations manager carried out quarterly audits of all aspects of the service to help ensure standards were being met. These audits had led to a number of improvements to the service.