Archived: Dyke Road Community Support Services

Dyke Road Community Support Services provides personal care to 13 adults at the time of the inspection

All people receiving care had a learning disability and additional needs such as dementia, mental health needs, sensory impairment, learning disability, autistic spectrum disorder, physical disability, Multiple Sclerosis or conditions related to old age and frailty.

People who use the service lived in two supported living houses. At the time of our inspection, 13 people lived across the two houses. The Care Quality Commission inspects the care and support the service provides to adults but does not inspect the accommodation they live in. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care, this is help with tasks related to personal hygiene, medicines and eating.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways; promotion of choice and control, independence and inclusion. 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 lived in supported living houses where seven people or less lived. 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

People told us that staff supported them and that staff were caring, a person said, “I have lots of support here, that’s good”. A relative said, “It’s super here, the care is excellent, [Person] is safe, I can’t fault the care.” Another relative told us, “They (staff) put the resident first.”

People's support focused on promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. 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.

We observed positive, friendly interactions between people and staff. Staff respected people and treated them with dignity and kindness. The culture of the service was positive, and person centred. People's independence was promoted and privacy respected.

People's needs were assessed before moving in and planned for. People had access to health and social care support, and staff worked with external professionals to support people. A relative told us, “She sees a physiotherapist and goes to hydrotherapy, she’s seen a dentist, she sees [specialist nurse].”

People received personalised care that was tailored to meet their individual needs, preferences and choices. Person centred support plans were detailed and guided staff about people's needs and how to meet them. People’s rooms were personalised to reflect people’s interests and decoration choices. People had access to communal lounges, dining rooms and a sensory room.

People's risks were identified and assessed appropriately such as accessing the community, money management and meeting strangers and staying safe. People were supported to take positive risks and staff had a value to not let identified risks to restrict people’s lives, a support worker told us, “They [people] have the choice to make poor choices or choose something we do not agree with, they have the right to do that”.

People were safe and were supported by staff who were trained to recognise the signs of any potential abuse. Staff had been trained in safeguarding and knew what action to take if they had any concerns about people's safety or welfare.

There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs. People were supported by staff whose suitability to work in the care sector was checked. Staff completed training that reflected people’s varied needs and ensured effective care to people. Staff received regular supervisions and told us they felt supported.

People and relatives knew how to make complaints and raise concerns and told us they felt listened to by staff. A person said, “If I’m unhappy about anything I can tell any of the staff or manager.” A relative said, “I have no concerns, if there is anything I speak to the staff and they see to it immediately.”

When things went wrong such as accidents and incidents, lessons were learnt. People were asked for their feedback about the service through house meetings, reviews, annual surveys and a suggestion box.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (published 19 March 2019).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

People’s experience of using this service:

¿The provider had not ensured that we were notified of all safeguarding incidents, which they are required by law to do.

¿People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; however, the systems in the service did not always support this practice. People’s capacity was not always assessed when in doubt, and people were not always involved in decisions about their capacity and in their best interests. However, people were involved in day to day decisions about their care.

¿We have made a recommendation that the service refers to current guidance on the Mental Capacity Act and the involvement of people.

¿The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways; promotion of choice and control, independence and inclusion. People’s support focussed on opportunities to gain new skills and maintain current independence and work toward more independence.

¿People were safe. Risks to people were assessed and mitigated. Systems and processes safeguarded people from abuse. There were enough staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. People’s medicines were managed safely and they were protected by the prevention and control of infection. People were supported to eat and drink, as appropriate.

¿People were treated with kindness and compassion. The culture of the service was positive and person-centred. Staff knew people well and communicated with people according to their individual needs. People’s independence was promoted and their dignity and privacy respected.

¿People’s needs were assessed and planned for. Staff checked regularly to ensure support plans reflected the support people needed. People had access to healthcare support, and staff worked with healthcare professionals to support people, including at the end of people’s lives.

¿Staff were supported with regular supervision, staff meetings and training. Staff told us they felt supported. New staff were recruited using safe procedures and supported with an induction to the service.

¿Staff worked well together and with other professionals. They shared information when necessary, and were mindful of protecting people’s confidentiality.

¿People knew how to make complaints. When complaints were made these were responded to quickly and effectively. When things went wrong, lessons were learnt.

Rating at last inspection: The service registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 February 2018 and this is their first inspection.

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection, following the registration of the location.

Enforcement: There was a breach of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. Please see the ‘action we have told the provider to take’ section towards the end of the report.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the intelligence we receive about this home and plan to inspect in line with our re-inspection schedule for those services rated Requires Improvement.