You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 11 July 2018

This inspection took place on 29 and 31 May 2018. The first day was unannounced, however we informed staff we would be returning for a second day to complete the inspection and announced this in advance.

Helping Hands provides domiciliary support to up to 13 people with learning disabilities, autism, physical disabilities and mental health needs. The service is provided in three units called; Bath house, Milton and New Build. The service is provided over 24 hours. Staff are present in the units at all times. This model of care is known as ‘supported living’.

At our last inspection of Helping Hands in February 2017 the home was rated as ‘Requires improvement’ overall due to not meeting the regulations in relation to record keeping and staff training. At this inspection we found the service had responded effectively and there had been significant improvement in both these areas.

People had been protected from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff understood what might be a safeguarding concern and how to respond to this.

The building and utilities had been maintained to a good standard with all necessary checks and certificates in place, including; gas, electrical, legionella and fire safety equipment.

Medication was safely managed, records were up to date and provided the necessary details in relation to all prescribed medicines including topical creams and dietary supplements and thickeners.

People’s needs had been assessed and care plans developed to ensure their needs were met as they preferred. Risk assessments provided guidance on how to support people to manage the risks in their daily lives.

Staff had received an increased level of training which had provided them with the necessary knowledge and skill to meet people’s needs. Staff reported feeling they had benefited from the training available.

The service was aware of its responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards including in domestic settings, known as (DIDs).

Staff were seen to be caring and supported people, kindly and respectfully. People living in the service said they thought the staff were kind and caring.

People received person centred care that was responsive to their needs. Care plans were reviewed and updated regularly.

The management structure was clear and staff reported being happy with the way the service was managed, they felt the manager could be relied on to take appropriate action and was supportive and fair.

Auditing and governance systems had been improved and ensured people received care and support consistently.

Relatives reported feeling able to approach the manager at any time and felt confident they would act on any concerns they raised.

Inspection areas



Updated 11 July 2018

The service was safe.

People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse.

Risk assessments ensured people had the right support to manage risks in their daily life.

Staff had been recruited safely with all necessary checks being completed.



Updated 11 July 2018

The service was effective.

People’s needs had been properly assessed in consultation with families and other professionals.

Staff received training appropriate to their roles.

The service had ensured they had met their obligations under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.



Updated 11 July 2018

The service was caring.

People living in the service said the staff were kind and caring and listened to them.

Relatives said the service was caring though one person felt the odd member of staff could be more attentive to their role.



Updated 11 July 2018

The service was responsive.

People received person centred care that was responsive to their needs.

People had been supported to develop their own care plans. One person said they felt they were involved.

Peoples concerns and complaints were managed and the service ensured people could talk about how they felt their concerns had been dealt with.



Updated 11 July 2018

The service was well led.

There was a clear culture and commitment to high quality care.

Staff were aware of the standard of care expected of them.

Governance systems ensured care and support was provided properly and gaps or errors had been identified by audits and addressed.