We carried out a review of the data available to us about March Supported Living Scheme on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about March Supported Living Scheme, you can give feedback on this service.
March Supported Living Service provides care and support to people living in five supported living settings, so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.
March Supported Living Service provides a service to, people with a learning disability, people with a physical disability, older people, people living with dementia, younger adults and people with sensory impairments.
Not everyone using March Supported Living Service receives the regulated activity of personal care. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with personal care, help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
At the time of our inspection there were 18 people using the service who received the regulated activity of personal care.
A registered manager was in post. The registered manager was on leave at the time of the inspection and an interim manager who knew the service well was available throughout the inspection. A registered manager 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.
The service was safe. People were safeguarded by staff who knew how to recognise and report any concerns. The provider identified risks to people and managed them well. Sufficient staff were in post and the recruitment process for new staff had helped ensure that only suitable staff were employed. Lessons were learned when things had not gone well and prompt action was taken to keep people safe. Staff administered medicines and managed them safely. Staff helped people to maintain a clean environment.
The service was effective. Staff met people’s needs and had the right training and skills to do this effectively. People had a varied and healthy diet and enough to eat and drink. People were enabled to access health care services. People were given choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The registered manager worked with other organisations such as the local authority who were involved in people’s care to help ensure that when people used the service they received consistent care.
The service was caring. People were cared for by staff and supported in a compassionate way. People’s privacy and dignity were promoted and respected. People were supported and encouraged to use an advocacy service when needed. People using the service were involved in deciding how their care was provided. People were treated with fairness whatever their needs were.
The service was responsive. People’s care was person-centred and at the heart of the service. Technology enhanced the quality of people’s lives, this made them more fulfilling. People raised concerns and they were acted on. People, relatives and family members had the support they needed when any person needed end of life care.
The service was well-led. The registered manager provided support to staff in a positive way. People had a say in how the service was run. Staff had the right skills and values to make a positive difference to people’s lives. Staff worked as a team to help people and each other. Quality assurance, audits and spot checks undertaken by the provider helped identify and drive improvements. An open and honest staff team culture was in place. The registered manager and staff worked in partnership with others including health care professionals.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
Staff received training to protect people from harm and they were knowledgeable about reporting any suspected harm. There were a sufficient number of staff employed and recruitment procedures ensured that only suitable staff were employed. Risk assessments were in place and actions were taken to reduce these risks. Arrangements were in place to ensure that people were supported and protected with the safe management of medicines.
The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. MCA applications were being made to ensure that people’s rights were protected. Staff were supported and trained regarding the MCA.
People were supported to access a range of health care professionals and they were provided with opportunities to increase their levels of independence. Health risk assessments were in place to ensure that people were supported to maintain their health. People had adequate amounts of food and drink to meet their individual preferences and nutritional needs.
People’s privacy and dignity were respected and their care and support was provided in a caring and a patient way
Sufficient numbers of staff were available and the appropriate recruitment checks had been completed to ensure they were suitable to carry out their role. A staff training and development programme was in place and procedures were in place to review the standard of staff members’ work performance.
People’s hobbies and interests had been identified and they were supported to take part in a range of activities that were meaningful to them. There were strong links with the external community.
A complaints procedure was in place and complaints had been responded to, to the satisfaction of the complainant. People could raise concerns with the staff at any time.
The provider had quality assurance processes and procedures in place to improve, if needed, the quality and safety of people’s support and care. People and their relatives were able to make suggestions in relation to the support and care provided and staff acted on what they were told.