Archived: Living Independently Staffordshire - Cannock

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.

People continued to be safe receiving support, and staff understood how to safeguard people from harm. Risks were managed to reduce potential hazards. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs, and the provider followed safe recruitment processes. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to hygiene and infection control. Staff were encouraged to learn and make improvements when incidents occurred.

Support was delivered in line with good practice guidance, and staff had the knowledge required to provide effective care. Staff supported people to maintain their physical health and wellbeing and to prepare meals of their choice. People were enabled to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff assisted them in the least restrictive way possible.

People received support from staff who were kind, compassionate and caring. They were involved in making decisions about their care. People’s privacy was respected, and their dignity and independence promoted.

The support people received was personal to them and they were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. People’s individual choices and preferences were considered, and their support reviewed to reflect their needs. People knew how to raise any concerns or complaints, and these were responded to in a timely manner.

The service was well led, and the management team were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff were motivated and enjoyed working at the service. People and staff were encouraged to give feedback, and their views were acted on to develop the service. The provider worked in partnership with other agencies and teams, and there were systems in place to drive ongoing improvements.

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 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 having support from the service. Staff were knowledgeable about the different types of abuse that could occur and described how they would recognise possible abuse or neglect. Staff told us how they would report any incidents or concerns straight away. Staff were confident that any concerns they reported would be acted on. Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and staff knew how to support people to reduce any risk of harm. Staff encouraged people to consider how they could reduce risks themselves at home. People we spoke with told us there were enough staff who were given time to meet their needs. The provider had suitable recruitment processes in place and when people needed support with their medicines this was done safely.

Staff had the knowledge and skills required to meet people’s needs and promote their independence. Staff knew about the support that people needed and were given the training they needed to carry out their role. Staff gained people’s consent prior to assisting them and ensured they were involved in decisions that were made. When needed, people were assisted to maintain a healthy balanced diet and people were encouraged to retain responsibility for their health care needs. Staff were able to support people with therapy plans that had been recommended by other professionals.

Positive caring relationships were developed with people who used the service and people’s dignity was promoted and privacy respected. People were actively involved with their support and given choices about their care.

People were involved in making decisions about their support and their situation was reviewed regularly so their needs were met and goals achieved. People received support that was individual to them and their support plans reflected how they liked to receive their care. Concerns and complaints were responded to and people were encouraged to raise any issues.

People who used the service, staff and other professionals were positive about the leadership and management in place. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and feed information back to the people who used it and the staff.