Supported Tenancy Network

Updated 23 January 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This was a planned comprehensive inspection which took place on 05, 06 and 10 December 2018. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice to ensure managers were available in the Salford office to facilitate the inspection.

The inspection was undertaken by one adult social care inspector. At the time of our inspection 60 people were using the service.

Before the inspection visit we reviewed the information we held about the service, including information we had received since the service registered with the Commission. We asked the service to complete the Provider Information Return (PIR), prior to the date of the inspection, which we received. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We reviewed the care and medication records of six people who used the service and records relating to the management of the service. We looked at seven staff personnel files, policies and procedures and quality assurance systems.

During our inspection we went to the provider’s head office and spoke with one registered manager (who was the director of compliance and risk) and one registered manager (who was the head of provision), one area manager, one service manager for compliance and risk and seven members of care staff. We also visited three properties and spoke to four people who used the service, five relatives and a local authority professional as part of the inspection; this was in order to seek feedback about the quality of service being provided.

Updated 23 January 2019

The Supported Tenancy Network provides services to people with learning disabilities and complex physical health needs so that they can live as independently as possible in their own homes. People who use the service are tenants in their own right and live with support in various types of accommodation provided by a variety of different landlords.

At the time of the inspection the service was made up of 18 homes, providing support for 60 people who live in the Salford area and who require 24-hour support. The head office is based at the Humphrey Booth Resource Centre, which is located in Swinton.

The provider, which is called Aspire for Intelligent Care and Support C.I.C Ltd, is an employee owned social enterprise and is a ‘community interest company,’ which registered with CQC in June 2015. At the time of the inspection the service continued to receive support from Salford local authority, who had previously operated the service, for human resources and IT support. The service also worked in partnership with the local authority for any new referrals to ensure a person-centred approach to the delivery of care and support.

The service has 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 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and 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.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

People told us they felt safe when receiving a service at home and were supported to have 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. People’s relatives also confirmed they felt [their relative] was safe.

The ethos of the service was to promote people’s skills and independence. People were supported and encouraged to do tasks for themselves, for example making and buying their own food. People were supported to take positive risks, such as travelling independently.

Each person had a communication care plan which comprehensively detailed how they communicated what they wanted and how they were feeling. This included verbal and non-verbal communication, with communication aids being used where required, for example in pictorial format.

Care plans were written with easy read symbols and simple words to inform people about their care, support and activities. Information was available in an easy read format, for example the guide to services and complaints procedure.

Risks people may face were assessed and clear guidance was provided for staff to reduce and manage these risks. Staff assessed people’s moods moment by moment and any activities undertaken were tailored to the person’s current mood and level of anxiety.

Detailed positive behaviour support plans were used to identify people’s complex behaviours and the strategies and techniques required to reduce their anxieties.

Comprehensive annual reviews were held, with family involvement, which identified what was working well, areas for development and strategies and plans for the future.

All incidents were recorded in detail and de-brief meetings were held to discuss any changes that could be made to people’s support plans to reduce the chance of further incidents.

Thorough holistic assessments were completed for people moving to the service. We saw a very positive example of the service assessing and planning a person’s move to the service.

There were sufficient staff available to ensure people's wellbeing, safety and security was protected. An appropriate recruitment and selection process continued to be in place which ensured new staff had the right skills and were suitable to work with people living in their own home.

Staff had a good understanding of systems in place to manage medicines and safeguarding matters. People's medicines were managed so they received them safely.

The service was working within the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA).

People’s relatives we spoke with said they involved in care planning and were confident that their comments and concerns would be acted upon. The provider took account of any complaints and comments to improve the service.

Risk assessments were in place for a number of areas and were regularly updated, and staff had a good knowledge and understanding of people’s health conditions, choices, likes and dislikes.

Feedback received from people who used the service and their relatives was overwhelmingly positive and people were encouraged to contribute their views. People were positive about the staff who supported them and told us they liked the staff and were treated with dignity and kindness.

People received support in relation to nutrition and hydration and were fully involved in menu planning and shopping.

There was an open and transparent culture and encouragement for people to provide feedback.

People and their relatives told us they were aware of how to make a complaint and were confident they could express any concerns which would be addressed.

Staff told us they enjoyed working for the organisation and spoke positively about the culture and management of the service. They also told us that they were encouraged to openly discuss any issues.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.