Archived: Lion Court

Lion Court is a domiciliary care agency and is registered to provide personal care to people with learning disabilities and/or mental health needs. Many of the people who access the service live in a tenancy and have twenty four hour support. There were 335 people receiving support at the time of the inspection.

The service did not have a registered manager in place at the time of the inspection. A recruitment process had commenced. 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 received training in how to recognise and report abuse. All staff were clear about how to report concerns and were confident that any allegations made would be fully investigated to help ensure people were protected. There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of the people who used the service.

People were protected by the registered provider’s safe recruitment practices. Staff underwent the necessary checks which determined they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults, before they started their employment.

People were supported to take their medicines by staff that were appropriately trained. People received care and support from regular staff that knew them well, and had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s individual needs.

Before people started using the service their needs were assessed to ensure the service could meet them. Following the assessments personalised care plans were developed with the person and their relatives, where appropriate, to agree how the care and support would be provided.

Care plans provided staff with clear direction and guidance about how to meet people’s individual needs. These were regularly reviewed and updated.

People’s risks were anticipated, identified and monitored. Staff managed risk effectively and supported people’s decisions, so they had as much control and independence as possible.

People said they would not hesitate to speak to any member of staff if they had concerns about the service they received. People and their relatives knew how to make a formal complaint if they needed to. We saw records that demonstrated the complaints procedure had been followed.

There was a management structure within the service which provided clear lines of responsibility and accountability.

There were quality assurance systems in place to identify any areas for improvement for staff.

People told us that they had been satisfied with the support they had received. They told us they liked and trusted their staff team. They also told us they had received the support they needed to follow their hobbies and increase their daily living skills as well as with their health and personal care needs.

We found that people had been supported to make decisions for themselves. Any decisions that needed to be made on their behalf had been made in consultation with their relative or representative and relevant professionals. People's right to refuse treatment or make a decision had been respected where they had capacity to make that particular decision.

We found that staff had the skills and experience to support people safely and well. Systems were in place to ensure as far as possible people were supported by staff who knew them well and were compatible with them.

People felt confident and comfortable to raise any concerns that they had. Complaints had been listened to and acted upon.

"I like it a lot, there's nothing bad".

"They take me out and I go on holiday".

"I like them, they look after me and help me with the things I can't do".

Staff told us they "enjoyed" working for Alternative Futures and commented that they were "well supported" by their line managers. One support worker told us,"this is the best place I've ever worked in". Staff told us how they provided care which was very "person centred" and how they supported people in different ways in order to meet their individual needs.

During our visit we also saw evidence that the staff were well supported in their roles and the organisation was monitoring the quality of the service provided on a regular basis.