Diverse Abilities Plus - Supported Living

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation, and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations in relation to good governance and notifications of significant incidents. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights. It was also based on engaging with people, their families and professionals to understand people's needs and challenges in meeting these.

Staff at all levels demonstrated a positive, compassionate, listening culture that prioritised people's needs and wishes, and promoted mutual trust and understanding with people. This was reflected in how they interacted with people, and what people and relatives said about staff and leaders. The registered managers and staff also demonstrated it in how they spoke to each other and with us. Relatives told us they found staff and leaders approachable.

Equality, diversity and human rights were incorporated into staff training. Staff discussed their relevance and application to people's care during supervision and staff meetings.

There were inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The registered managers and their manager had knowledge and insight into issues and priorities for the quality of the service. They had access to support and development in their role and were open to learning and improving to benefit people using the service. They had acted on the findings from the last inspection, making changes that increased their contact with people and staff, and improved their oversight of the service.

Leaders were alert to any examples of poor culture. They acted promptly and proportionately to any concerns about shortfalls in the quality of people’s care.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people, relatives and staff felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

When things went wrong, people and relatives received a sincere and timely apology. The registered managers discussed with them what they were doing to prevent a recurrence. A relative mentioned the registered managers had set up regular meetings to keep them updated about these actions.

Staff understood their responsibility to speak up about wrongdoing, such as poor or unsafe practice, which the provider's policies supported. They knew how to report their concerns to external organisations, although they were confident leaders would listen to them and act as necessary. Supervision and staff meetings regularly covered whether staff had concerns and how to raise these. Records of complaints and incidents reflected thorough and transparent investigations resulting in proportionate action.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them, reflecting their value of being inclusive and respectful to all. They acted on their people management policies to support equality, diversity and inclusion in the workforce, ensuring reasonable adjustments were implemented where required. They published their gender pay gap data annually, as the law requires. All staff had equality and diversity training, and leaders recognised the diversity of staff within their teams.

There were clear staff roles and responsibilities, systems of accountability and good governance. This enabled the provider to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Leaders used information effectively to monitor and improve the quality of care. The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance. They had made improvements and were no longer in breach. There were effective systems for assessing, monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service. These included regular audits of various aspects of care and service management including medicines management, care planning, record keeping, accounting for people's property and money, and the monitoring and analysis of accidents, incidents and complaints. The registered managers ensured any shortfalls were rectified.

The provider was previously in breach of the regulation in relation to notifying CQC of significant incidents. The provider had made improvements and was no longer in breach of this regulation. Managers now notified CQC of significant events such as safeguarding adults referrals.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. They discussed the expectations of their roles in supervision meetings. Supervision enabled the registered managers to account for the actions, behaviours and performance of staff.

There were robust arrangements for the service to operate safely in an emergency, such as severe weather or computer system failure. This included arrangements to protect data. Confidential personal information was kept secure. Staff had unique user identities and passwords to access the computerised care planning and recording system. They had training in data protection and security requirements.

Leaders understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

Staff and leaders worked in partnership with key organisations to support care provision, service development and joined-up care. These included organisations that commissioned people's care, health and social care professionals, and care provider networks. The service had received positive feedback from some of these stakeholders, as we did during the inspection, about positive and effective working relationships.

Staff and leaders were open and transparent in their communication with people and their relatives. Relatives said the service kept them well informed, for example, "Lots of communication between staff and managers and they inform me of anything that goes on with [person] or if anything goes wrong."

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement. They encouraged staff to take a creative approach to people's care and support, to promote positive outcomes for people and boost their quality of life.

Since the last inspection, the provider had refined their processes to ensure learning when things went wrong, and from examples of good practice. The registered managers now reviewed accidents and incidents monthly, enabling them to spot any developing trends at an earlier stage. They also encouraged staff to reflect on and learn from things that went wrong, such as errors with medicines.

Staff and leaders involved people using the service and their families in developing and evaluating improvements. This related both to people's care planning and delivery and to more general service developments. Relatives told us, "Have regular meetings and I can say they need to change this or do that. Always opportunities for me to input” and "Just started parent family friends meetings once a quarter. We are given the opportunity to discuss things and hear from Diverse Abilities what they’re doing."