You are here

FitzRoy Supported Living - Trafford Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 8 January 2019

During a routine inspection

We inspected FitzRoy Supported Living –Trafford on 8, 9 and 15 January 2019. The first day of the inspection was announced. The provider was given 24 hours' notice of the inspection because the location provides a community-based service and we needed to be sure someone would be available.

This service provided care and support to people living in 'supported living' settings. In supported living, people live in their own home as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; we looked at people's personal care and support. At the time of this inspection the service was providing support to 19 people in four 'supported living' settings for adults over 18 years, people living with learning disabilities, physical disabilities and/or autistic spectrum disorder and people with sensory impairments.

At the last inspection in November 2017, there were three breaches of legal requirements in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 in respect of assessing people's capacity, auditing systems had identified issues with the quality of the service, but these were not always being addressed in an effective way and we found the registered provider had not ensured that there was always enough staff to meet people's needs. At this inspection we found the requirements had been fully met.

The care 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.

The service had 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. The registered manager was also supported by a service development and implementation manager and two deputy managers.

Since our last inspection we found noticeable improvements in developing new systems for audit and quality assurance. A new suite of audit tools had been introduced covering key aspects of service delivery.

Prior to our inspection we were notified in June 2018 by the provider they had made a safeguarding referral and contacted the Police due to finding a significant amount of money missing from people’s bank accounts at one of the supported living services. As a result of an internal investigation the provider found significant failures in respect of the registered and deputy managers finance checks of people’s monies. At the time of this inspection the Police were still conducting their inquiries in respect of the allegations of theft against a staff member and the provider made a timely referral to the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). The provider also reimbursed all monies that were stolen from people and the auditing of people’s finances was fully reviewed by the provider, which resulted in thorough checks being completed on all financial transactions at the service and the other three supported living services.

At the last inspection we found the provider did not have a clear overview of the staffing hours being provided at Highfield Avenue. At this inspection we found the staffing levels were being appropriately deployed across all of the four supported living services. There were enough staff to support people and the provider carried out checks to make sure new staff were suitable to work in the service.

At the last inspection we found staff had limited understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and required mental capacity assessment were not always undertaken. At this inspection the provider underst

Inspection carried out on 15 November 2017

During a routine inspection

We inspected FitzRoy Supported Living –Trafford on 15 and 16 November 2017. The first day of the inspection was announced. The provider was given 48 hours' notice of the inspection because the location provides a community based service and we needed to be sure someone would be available.

At the time of this inspection the service was providing support to 19 people in four 'supported living' accommodations for adults over 18 years, older people, people living with learning disabilities, physical disabilities and/or autistic spectrum disorder and people with sensory impairments. Supported living describes the arrangement whereby people with learning disabilities are supported to live independently in their own tenancies.

At the last inspection on 04 and 05 April 2016, we rated the service as overall "Good". Four months after that inspection we received concerns relating to the staffing levels and medication errors at one of the supported living services, Orchard Court. As a result we undertook a focused inspection to look into those concerns on 28 September 2016. During this inspection we found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 relating to the staffing levels.

The service had a registered manager. 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 found the provider did not have a clear overview of the staffing hours being provided at Highfield Avenue. We noted a number of discrepancies in relation to the evening support of four hours that had not been provided consistently for a number of months.

Staff had limited understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and followed the principles on a day to day basis. However, people's ability to make a decision had not been assessed before decisions were made on their behalf. There was a risk decisions could be made for people who were in fact able to decide for themselves.

Staff were knowledgeable about the different types of abuse people might be vulnerable to and knew what action to take to safeguard people from harm. Staff looked after money for people and there were effective systems to protect people from financial abuse.

Medicines were managed safely and people were encouraged to be as involved as possible with their medicines. Protocols around the use of 'as and when needed' medicines were in place for people who required this.

People had good relationships with the staff who supported them. Staff knew people well and treated them with dignity and respect. People had some opportunities to express themselves and have a say about their care on a day to day basis, but we found an inconsistent approach by the provider to evidence people’s involvement when planning and reviewing their care.

New employees were required to go through an induction which included training identified as necessary for the service and familiarisation with the service and the organisation's policies and procedures. There was also a period of working alongside more experienced staff until such a time as the worker felt confident to work alone.

Some people attended local day services, or completed voluntary work. People were supported to be part of their local community and follow their interests or hobbies. However, we found social outings during the weekends did not take place, due to no flexibility in the staffing structure to allow additional staff to work the weekends. The registered manager felt this was the case due to a lack of commissioned hours to use during the weekends.

People had support to eat healthily and planned their own menus. Some people were supported to complete batch cooking for their meals, while others used microwavable foods du

Inspection carried out on 28 September 2016

During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made

This inspection was unannounced and took place on the 28 September 2016.

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Fitzroy Supported Living – Trafford on 04 and 05 April 2016 when it was found to be meeting all the regulatory requirements which were inspected at that time. After that inspection we received concerns relating to the staffing levels and medication errors at one of the supported living services, Orchard Court. As a result we undertook a focused inspection to look into those concerns. This report only covers our findings in relation to those topics. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for FitzRoy Supported Living – Trafford on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

FitzRoy Supported Living – Trafford provides supported living service for 15 people with a learning disability. Five people were receiving this support at Orchard Court at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

During this inspection we found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 relating to the staffing levels. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

When we commenced our inspection at 8am we found two people were up and dressed. The other two people were still being supported with their personal care needs. We observed the one care worker on shift rushing between both people to ensure they were ready in time for their daily activities. We received a mixed response from people receiving the service regarding whether or not there were enough staff on duty to meet their needs. People’s representatives and staff told us they didn’t feel there was enough staff on duty, particularly in the mornings to meet people’s needs.

Medicines were ordered, stored, administered and disposed of safely. However we found the registered provider did not record the room temperatures where people’s medicines were stored.

We recommend the registered manager reviews the 'NICE guidance' on ‘Managing medicines for people receiving social care in the community’ as this provides good practice recommendations for the management of medicines.

People's support plans were detailed and person-centred. Support plans contained information about how people liked to communicate and be supported in all aspects of their care. Daily care records evidenced that staff supported people according to their support plans and we observed this during the inspection.

Appropriate plans were in place to guide staff in how to minimise risks to keep people safe. Staff knew what action to take to ensure people were protected if staff suspected they were at risk of harm. They were encouraged to raise and report any concerns they had about people through safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures.

Inspection carried out on 4 April 2016

During a routine inspection

We inspected FitzRoy Supported Living - Trafford on 04 and 05 April 2016. The inspection was announced. At the last inspection in September 2013 we found the service met all the regulations we looked at.

The service at 98 Lorraine Road provides ‘supported living’ accommodation for six people with learning disabilities in four flats. Supported living describes the arrangement whereby people with learning disabilities are supported to live independently in their own tenancies. At this service, two flats provide single accommodation and two are shared. There is an office and staff sleeping room adjoined to the flats.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Staff had a working knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act in terms of people’s capacity to consent. However, there was confusion about whether people were being deprived of their liberty and when the service should apply for authorisation if people’s liberty was being deprived so we made a recommendation about training around this.

People told us that they felt safe at 98 Lorraine Road. Relatives we spoke with agreed. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood how to safeguard vulnerable people.

People, their relatives and the staff thought there were sufficient support workers to meet people’s needs. We saw that the service used a robust recruitment process.

The home undertook risk assessments for all aspects of people’s care and support. Facilities and equipment were well maintained and regular health and safety checks of the premises were made. People’s flats were clean and tidy and they told us staff supported them with cleaning tasks.

People’s medicines were well managed by the service. Support staff administering medicines had been trained and assessed for competence and documentation was filled in correctly.

Support workers received the training they needed to support the people safely. They also had regular supervision with the registered manager and an annual appraisal.

People were supported by staff to write their own shopping lists and to shop for and prepare the foods they chose. They were also supported to access a range of healthcare professionals in order to maintain their holistic health.

People and their relatives told us that the staff were caring and that they promoted their dignity and respected their privacy. We saw staff interacting with people in a warm and friendly way and it was clear that staff knew people very well as individuals.

Staff promoted people’s independence by giving them choices and encouraging them to do as much as they could manage for themselves. People were referred to advocates when they needed them and were supported by staff and their families to design end of life care plans.

People’s support plans were detailed and person-centred. Support plans contained information about how people liked to communicate and be supported in all aspects of their care. Daily care records evidenced that staff supported people according to their support plans and we observed this during the inspection.

People and their relatives had an annual meeting with support staff, to which staff from the day centre (if they attended) and the local authority were invited. At this meeting people’s progress and future goals were discussed.

People and their relatives told us that people had enough to do. We saw that people had sufficient opportunities to take part in person-centred activities.

There was an effective system in place for the audit and monitoring of safety and quality at the service.

The service had an open culture. People, their relatives, staff and other healthcare professionals involved with th

Inspection carried out on 18 September 2013

During a routine inspection

Relative’s told us: “Staff have been brilliant, my X has had an unsettled year and they have coped tremendously,” and “Staff have been extremely willing to fit X in and accommodate their needs, communication is good, any problems they let me know and vice versa,” and “X has been happy all the time they have been there, whenever they visit us, they are always happy to go home, because that’s how they see it, home. I think they (staff) do a great job.”

We looked at three support plans, they all contained detailed profiles of individuals, highlighting likes and dislikes and things important to people. Support plans also documented people’s wishes, including what support people would like.

We observed people were comfortable and happy interacting with staff; staff were calm and understood how to meet individual’s needs. We observed only positive interactions between staff and the people they supported.

People were supported to be able to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs.

We found systems were in place for medicines to understand how they are ordered, stored, administered and disposed of.

People who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their support and they were acted on.

Inspection carried out on 14 December 2012

During a routine inspection

The support for people living at Lorraine Road varied depending on their assessed needs. People were supported in accessing the local and wider community and took part in activities in and away from their own home.

During our visit we spoke with two people who lived at Lorraine Road. One person said they were “happy” and “liked the staff as they helped them”. The second person was looking forward to attending a Christmas party that evening.

We observed staff interacting with people. It was clear staff understood their needs and had a good relationship with them.

We also spoke with staff about working for the service. They told us that there was “good communication” between the team and felt there were sufficient staff available to support people.

We did find that some information contained within care records and policies and procedures needed reviewing so that the information was accurate and up to date.

Inspection carried out on 17 June 2011

During a routine inspection

One person told us that staff helped her with housework and that staff treated her nicely.

Relatives of people who use the service and they told us that they felt their cared for relative was safe and that staff protected them from abuse.

One relative told us 'Staff are like a family' and they were happy with the care provided.

People who used the service told us that they were well treated and treated respectfully.

People who used the service told us they were able to express their opinions about how their care was delivered what they liked or disliked about the service and what they wanted to do.