23 January 2018
During a routine inspection
Alternative Futures Group (Rochdale Branch) provides care to people who live across Greater Manchester in supported tenancies and who require a range of support relating to their learning or physical disability, sensory impairment or mental health needs. The service is based in Rochdale, but provides support to people living in supported tenancies across greater Manchester. At the time of our inspection the service supported over 160 people.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 present during the inspection.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to protect vulnerable adults from abuse and we saw that when safeguarding concerns were raised these were investigated appropriately. The service had good systems to allow a person centred response to allegations and outcomes which considered the views and wishes of people who used the service. Environmental risks were taken into consideration when planning services, and similarly specific risks to people who used the service were reviewed.
There were enough staff. Safe recruitment procedures ensured that people were protected from unsuitable staff, and people who used the service were involved in the recruitment process. There was a low rate of staff turnover, and we saw that training opportunities helped people who worked for Alternative Futures to develop their skills and improve their knowledge.
Care was person centred, and we saw in care plans consideration of personal wishes and preferences. Staff we spoke with understood issues of capacity and consent and people were supported to make meaningful choices. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The service had developed good working relationships with health care professionals to ensure that people’s health needs were monitored and assessed.
Throughout our inspection we saw that people who used the service received person centred support from staff who showed genuine affection for the people they supported. People told us that they were treated with dignity and respect and when we visited them in their own homes we saw positive interactions and healthy relationships had been established. Cultural and religious needs were taken into consideration and people were involved in planning their own care. This was reflected in care plans. We saw evidence of regular review involving the person and their representatives, and staff would persevere to help people to reach their goals, for example, by exploring activities to widen social horizons. Independence was promoted and encouraged, and where issues which could hinder people’s independence were identified, creative solutions were sought to overcome the problem.
Alternative Futures had developed good systems to manage the service. The service had invested in intermediate technology systems to monitor service delivery and regular supervision and team meetings ensured staff were both kept informed and consulted on issues which affected the service. Written information was passed on to people who used the service using appropriate methods, such as signs and easy read leaflets. People were consulted about service delivery and their feedback was used to plan future service delivery.