• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Summerland Support

Overall: Good

307 Babbacombe Road, Torquay, Devon, TQ1 3TB (01803) 292555

Provided and run by:
Summerlands Support Ltd

All Inspections

5 May 2022

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Summerland Support on 5 May 2022. 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 Summerland Support, you can give feedback on this service.

23 April 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service:

Summerland Support provides care and support to people living in five ‘supported living’ settings, so they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate the premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. At the time of our inspection 32 people were living across the five houses, and five other people were being supported through an outreach service. Of the people being supported three were receiving personal care, which is the regulated activity CQC registers and inspects. Other people were supported through an enabling role, which is not required to be registered, so was not reviewed on this inspection.

The service supports people with different needs and backgrounds. These included people with learning disabilities, some physical disabilities, mental health needs, autism spectrum disorders and people who have behaviours that may challenge themselves or others.

People’s experience of using this service:

People and their relatives spoke highly of the service they received from Summerland Support. The service had strong person-centred values and placed people’s wellbeing at the heart of their work. People received personalised support which met their needs and preferences.

We found some people had restrictions in place, which were aimed at ensuring their safety. The registered manager agreed they would discuss one person’s capacity with the supporting community team to ensure the person’s rights were being protected.

People were involved in making decisions about the planning and delivery of their support and this was done in a way which encouraged their independence. Some people lived significantly independent lives, other people needed more support and had individualised care for much of the time. People living at the service were supported to follow activities of their choice, as well as develop life skills such as budgeting and cooking. The service had a football team which competed in a local league, which people enjoyed.

Staff knew people well and worked hard to enable them to share their views, make choices and live active lives. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support. This meant people were based in and were involved with their local community, and people’s support was focused on them having as many opportunities and choices as possible.

Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were assessed and acted upon. People were protected from potential abuse by staff who were confident in raising concerns. There was a thorough recruitment process in place that checked potential staff were safe to work with people who may be vulnerable.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who worked hard to promote their independence and sense of wellbeing. People and relatives told us the staff team was “brilliant”. Staff were provided with the training, supervision and support they needed to care for people well.

There was strong leadership at the service. People, relatives and staff spoke highly of the management team and there was a positive culture at the service. People were able to make changes both to their care and the service overall.

There were effective quality assurance systems in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.

More information is in the full report

Rating at last inspection: This service was last inspected on 5 and 6 October 2016 and was rated good overall and in every key question. The report was published 8 November 2016.

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection and was based on the previous rating.

Follow up: Going forward, we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect inline with our re-inspection schedule for those services rated as good. We will continue to monitor the intelligence we receive about the service. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

For more details please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

5 October 2016

During a routine inspection

Summerland Support provides support to people with learning disabilities. The support is provided to people who live as tenants in five properties owned by Summerland Support Limited, under a Supported Living scheme. A supported living scheme is one where people live in their own home and receive care and support in order to promote their independence. At the time of our inspection the service provided support to 27 people living in their own homes. However, only six people required support to meet their personal care needs. Therefore we only looked at the care and support received by those people. Summerland Support provides other services which help people to live independently, such as assistance with shopping and enabling people undertake activities in the community.

This inspection took place on 5 and 6 October 2016. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice that the inspection would be taking place. This was because the location provides a supported living service to people who are often out during the day; we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The service was last inspected on 22 July 2013, when it was compliant with the regulations relevant at that time.

A registered manager was employed at the service. 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.

Kind and caring staff ensured people received support that was responsive to their needs and as set out on their support plans. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity was respected. Staff knew the people they supported well and ensured their preferences were met. People attended day services; local community groups and regularly went on holidays. People had recently returned from a holiday in Majorca. We saw photographs of everyone enjoying themselves.

Relatives were complimentary about the support provided by staff. One relative told us they could not “praise staff highly enough. They are wonderful”.

People’s support plans described how staff were to support people. They gave staff directions on how to manage any behaviours that may place the person or others at risk. Any risks to people were identified and plans put in place to minimise the risks.

People were supported to make choices in all aspects of their lives. One person told us how they had been supported to obtain paid employment. People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about the support provided by staff. One relative told us they were always invited to discuss their relations support plan and said “It’s (support planning) a team event for [person’s] benefit”. People were supported to maintain a healthy balanced diet. They were supported to plan, shop for and prepare their meals. Staff ensured people’s health care needs were addressed. People were supported to attend healthcare appointments when necessary.

People were supported to attend a variety of events outside of their homes. People attended regular day service placements, colleges and paid employment as well as social activities such as the cinema, karaoke and discos.

Following the inspection we received emails from three social and healthcare professionals who told us how well people were supported by staff. One GP wrote ‘They (people) all attend their planned GP appointments with support workers who are professional and caring. I often have correspondence with the Manager as/when they have any health concerns about [people]. I do not have any concerns about the quality of support provided’. People were supported to take their medicines at the times they were prescribed.

People were protected from the risks of abuse. Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse both within the service and to outside agencies. Thorough recruitment procedures ensured the risks of employing unsuitable staff were minimised. People’s human rights were upheld because staff displayed a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff told us they would always respect people’s decisions even if they disagreed with them. One staff member told us “Everyone has the right to make an unwise decision”.

Staff received training that helped them meet people’s needs. This included first aid and supporting people living with dementia. New staff received a thorough induction. Staff received regular supervision to support them in their role. Staff told us the registered manager was very supportive and approachable.

There were effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor care. Regular audits were undertaken to ensure the quality of care was maintained. The registered manager ensured their knowledge was kept up to date by attending forums and receiving monthly updates from care organisations.

22, 23 July 2013

During a routine inspection

We the Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspected this service as part of a scheduled inspection. We also followed up on concerns we had found on a previous inspection on the 3 and 5 October 2012.

People told us they felt involved in decisions made with them. Some people, who needed more support, had decisions made on their behalf. Staff used the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and completed capacity assessments when supporting people who could not make informed decisions.

We observed positive interactions between people and staff. Staff were patient, kind and compassionate in the interactions we saw. One person said 'Staff take care of me'. Another said 'They try their hardest to keep me happy. I have been much happier since I moved here'.

People had access to health care professionals to help meet their health needs. Care plans related to the development of skills and achievement of goals. People confirmed that they had set their own goals. Two people talked us through their goals.

The provider had taken steps to protect people from abuse. Staff received training in safeguarding. People told us that they felt safe.

Staff received regular supervision and an annual appraisal. Staff told us that they felt supported. One member of staff said 'Things are so much better since the new manager started'.

There were systems for identifying risk and assessing quality. The manager sent us a service development plan. Records were stored securely.

6, 20 December 2012

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection to follow up on enforcement action we had taken following the inspection of this service on 3 October 2012. We had asked the provider to take action to ensure that people had opportunities to be involved in making decisions about their lives; to be supported to develop skills to become more independent and to be supported to be involved in their own care.

We found that the provider had taken appropriate action.

People had been supported to develop care plans detailing their goals and aims. Care plans contained clear information about what actions were needed to support people to acheive their goals. People who could not read said that staff read and explained their care plans to them. They showed us that the care plans had pictures to help them to understand the information. One person said that they were now managing their own medicines and monies. Another person told us they were helping to manage their own money. They were delighted to be doing this using the house computer, which they had previously not been allowed to use. Some staff changes had taken place in response to people's feedback about how they were being supported and their involvement in decision making.

3, 5 October 2012

During a routine inspection

This inspection was scheduled and we also wanted to follow up on areas of non compliance identified at the inspection in August 2011. People told us they felt involved in the decisions made about them. Some people were involved, however, others, who needed more support, had decisions made on their behalf without appropriate support, information or guidance. Staff were not using the mental capacity act code of practice to guide their actions.

People were able to see health care professionals and have their health promoted. However, assessments and care plans did not demonstrate that people were involved in developing their own care plans and did not contain all the information they should. Care plans did not contain information relating to the development of skills and achievement of goals and ambitions.

Staff received training in safeguarding people and people were comfortable with staff. The provider had not taken adequate steps to fully protect people from abuse. There were enough staff to meet people's needs, although staff were not fully supported to meet people's needs. Systems for identifying risk and assessing quality were not adequate.

4 August 2011

During a routine inspection

We met with six people who receive support from this agency, in three of the houses where they hold tenancies.

People told us 'They're there when I need them'. One person told us which of the staff were helping them move towards living independently.

One person told us they knew that they could obtain support from a different agency if they wanted, though this would be difficult to do because support is regularly shared between a group of people. This person was 'more than satisfied with the service'. They were able to choose which support worker to discuss issues or the way forward. They said the Manager is 'very good, and does things quickly'. They said they were well able to communicate with the Manager and Support staff.

We were told that staff were 'very kind', and also that they can be firm when helping people keep to their boundaries. Three people told us they were planning to move to a more independent home of their own at some point in the future. One of them said it would boost their confidence if they could have support from the same people when they move.

One person told us they 'love cooking with the staff', and that they were good at cooking lasagne. Others made good quality tea and coffee for us.

The complaints that people brought to our attention were all about repairs to buildings and equipment that had not been carried out. These are the responsibility of the landlord (who is also the provider), and not part of this assessment.