You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 September 2017

The inspection took place on 1, 2 and 5 June 2017 and was announced. We contacted the service 24 hours before the inspection to ensure the manager would be in the office. The service was last inspected in August 2014, where no concerns were identified and it received a rating of Good.

LDC Supported Living is registered to provide personal care to people with learning disabilities, living in their own homes. Some people lived in their own flats or houses and others in shared accommodation, such as two/three bedroom houses, where they shared communal areas with other people. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 28 people across Dover, Ashford and Folkestone.

The service had a registered manager who was available on the days of 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.

We received positive feedback about LDC from people, relatives and professionals. We heard about good standards of care and support which improved people’s wellbeing and the quality of people's lives. We observed warm, caring attitudes from staff and a drive to provide a quality service for people.

People trusted staff and felt safe whilst being supported by them. Staff had received training in how to safeguard people. They knew what signs to look out for which would cause concern and how to report them so the appropriate action could be taken to help keep them safe.

A system to recruit new staff was in place. This was to make sure that the staff employed to support people were fit to do so. People's needs were met promptly and effectively by staff who knew people and their preferences very well. Staff had completed comprehensive induction training when they first started to work at the service. Staff were supported during their induction, monitored and assessed to check that they had attained the right skills and knowledge to be able to care for, support and meet people’s needs. Management staff carried out routine checks of staff knowledge and capability.

Staff received a comprehensive programme of training and were supported to develop their skills and knowledge. The provider encouraged progression and supported staff to attain qualifications. There were staff meetings, so staff could discuss any issues and share new ideas with their colleagues, to improve people’s care and support.

Staff had undertaken training in The Mental Capacity Act (MCA). The MCA provides the legal framework to assess people’s capacity to make certain decisions, at a certain time. When people are assessed as not having the capacity to make a decision, a best interest decision is made involving people who know the person well and other professionals, where relevant.

The registered manager and management team provided clear leadership to the staff and led by example. Staff were motivated and felt well supported by management and the provider. Staff felt that the provider was committed to their wellbeing and were committed to the values of LDC. Staff treated people as individuals and each person received person centred support. Staff told us the registered manager and management team were very approachable and they were positive about their style of management.

Medicines were stored and administered safely. People were supported in safe environments and possible risks to people had been identified and were managed to keep people as safe as possible whilst enabling people to live as independent a life as possible. People's health was monitored and professional advice sought quickly and efficiently as needed. Staff worked collaboratively with health professionals, especially from the local community teams, forming working relationships which had led to goo

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 8 September 2017

The service was safe.

Medicines were well managed. Appropriate arrangements were in place for the safe storage, administration and disposal of medicines.

There were effective staff recruitment and selection procedures in place.

People felt safe and were supported by staff who knew how to identify signs of abuse and what action to take.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 September 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received extensive training, supervision and support to have the skills and knowledge they needed to be effective in their roles.

Staff were clear about the importance of gaining consent and giving people choice and followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act to ensure decisions were made by people or in people’s best interests.

People’s health and nutritional needs were monitored and staff ensured people had access to external healthcare professionals when they needed it.

Caring

Good

Updated 8 September 2017

The service was caring.

Staff knew people very well. They were kind, caring and compassionate and had developed positive relationships with people and their family members.

Staff took the time needed to communicate with people and included people in conversations. People were enabled to make daily decisions and choices.

Staff spoke with people in a caring, dignified and compassionate way. People were treated with kindness, respect and dignity.

Responsive

Outstanding

Updated 8 September 2017

The service was exceptionally responsive.

People were fully involved in planning their care, treatment and support, which reflected their choices and preferences.

The service was flexible, adaptable and responsive to people’s changing needs and wishes and in the way it delivered services.

Staff had an excellent understanding of people’s needs and preferences.

People and relatives knew how to raise a concern or complaint and felt listened to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 September 2017

The service was well-led.

There was an open culture where people and their relatives were asked about their experiences and they were listened to and feedback acted on.

Staff understood the vision and values of the service and how to put these into practice.

Systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service were effective in driving improvements.

The service worked in partnership with other organisations to make sure they were following current practice and to identify areas that could be improved.