As part of our inspection we briefly spoke with two people who used the service and two members of staff. We spoke with the registered manager and an operations manager. We spoke with a visiting social care professional. We were unable to obtain the full views of people directly supported by the service. This was because the people using the service would find it difficult to reliably give their opinion about the service they received due to their learning disability.We considered all the evidence we gathered under the outcomes we inspected. Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
Safeguarding procedures were being used by staff to ensure people were being kept safe. The manager had previously been made aware that incidents involving restraint should be reported under safeguarding and this was now in place.
Appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards had been applied for when restrictions had been identified as required to keep people safe.
There was no record that one person with diabetes had seen the podiatrist for nail care at the frequencies identified in their care plan.
Is the service effective?
Staff told us that they had useful and regular supervision. We found staff training was up to date and relevant to their job role. One member of staff told us, 'There is always someone to go to for advice if I need it.' Another member of staff told us, 'The manager is always putting new things up on the notice boards for us to read.'
We found that people were supported to do things that were important and of interest to them.
We found staff communicated well with people using the service.
Is the service caring?
Staff knew about people's interests and we saw that staff were friendly and warm in their interactions with people who used the service.
Staff put effort in to finding activities and outings that people using the service would enjoy.
Is the service responsive?
Reviews of care plans and risk assessments had not been completed for one person when they showed repeated behaviour that challenged. Actions had been identified that could possibly help a person manage their own positive behaviour however these had not been implemented. Input into the strategies and training used by staff from a behaviour therapist to help manage a person's behaviour had been delayed.
Staff had taken on board people's preferences to arrange activities that people would enjoy.
Staff had responded to changes in people's methods of communication as these had developed and changed over time.
Is the service well-led?
Audits had been used by the service and improvements had been identified. However, not all risks regarding window restrictors had been identified.
People's views had not been gathered to inform the manager's view on the quality of the service.
Regular checks were in place to make sure equipment used in the service was working effectively.
Staff reported accidents and incidents appropriately and the manager had investigated when a complaint had been received.