We carried out a review of the data available to us about Creative Support - Wolverhampton Services on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Creative Support - Wolverhampton Services, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People were supported to remain safe by staff who were knowledgeable about the different types of abuse and how to report concerns. People had risk assessments in place which explored current and historical risks and enabled staff to reduce the potential risk of harm to people.
People were supported to receive their medicines safely. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet and had access to health professionals when they needed them. People were involved in decisions regarding their care and their independence was encouraged by staff, this allowed people to have greater control over their lives.
People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their preferences. This enabled people to develop strong relationships with the people who supported them. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care along with those who were important to them. This ensured care was person centred and needs led.
People were supported by safely recruited staff. Staff had training which enabled them to support people effectively. People felt able to speak to staff and management and knew how to complain. The service acted on feedback to continuously improve the care they provided.
Accidents and incidents were monitored by the management team and actions were taken to reduce any future risks to people. This enabled the provider to learn lessons where things went wrong.
Rating at last inspection: Creative Support- Wolverhampton Service was rated as ‘Good’ at their last inspection (Published 22 November 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection to confirm that this service remained ‘Good’.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people receive safe, compassionate, high quality care. Further inspections will be planned for future dates.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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’s relatives told us they were confident their family members were safe with the staff who provided their care and support. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in protecting people from harm and knew how to report any concerns about people’s safety. Risks to people had been assess and were managed in a way that did not restrict people. Some relatives felt their family members would benefit from a more consistent staff team. There were systems in place to ensure people’s medicines were managed safely.
People were supported by a staff team who had received training to ensure they had the skills required to meet their needs. Staff told us they felt supported by the management team. People were asked for their consent before care and support was provided. People received support to maintain a healthy diet and were assisted to access healthcare services when required.
People were supported by staff who were friendly and kind. Staff knew people’s needs and preferences and people were supported to make their own decisions where possible. Staff understood the importance of supporting people in a way that protected their privacy and dignity and promoted their independence.
People and their relatives were involved in the planning, delivery and review of their care and support. Staff knew people well and were aware of people’s likes and dislikes. People were aware of who to contact if they were unhappy about any aspect of their care and support and there was a system in place to manage complaints.
People, relatives and social care professionals expressed positive views about the service. People and their relatives had been asked to give feedback about the service they received. This was then used to develop and improve the service. Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the standards of care and support provided and the provider was aware of their responsibilities as a registered person.
We found that people were supported to make choices and decisions about the care that they received. Where people were unable to make decisions for themselves the provider had involved the people that knew them best to make decisions about the care they received.
We found that relatives we spoke with were happy about the care people received. One relative told us it was: "The care is really quite good".
We found that there were sufficient staff recruitment systems in place.
We found that the provider had systems in place to measure the quality of the service provided.
People told us that, 'Yes feel involved'. They told us that they had seen their support plans and confirmed that these reflected the support that they wanted.
We looked at three people's care records and found that these set out people's support needs clearly and were updated on a regular basis. We spoke with people and they told us that the care and support they received reflected want they wanted. One person said they were, 'Happy with care' they received.
People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.
People's involvement and consent to medications were managed in a way that protected them against risks associated with medicines.
Care workers told us that they were well supported by the manager and that they received regular and sufficient training that allowed them to do their jobs well.
People who used the service, their representatives and stakeholders were asked for their views about how the agency performed.