28 December 2017
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This comprehensive inspection took place on 28 November 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 36 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available for the inspection. It also allowed us to arrange to visit people receiving a service in their own homes.
Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the information in the PIR and also looked at other information we held about the service before the inspection visit.
Your Life (Taunton) provides personal care to people in an assisted housing complex. At the time of the inspection they were providing personal care to four people. We visited one person in their home and two in communal spaces to discuss the care package they received.
We spoke with two staff members and the registered manager. We looked at records which related to people’s individual care and the running of the service. Records seen included four care and support plans, quality audits and action plans, three staff recruitment files and records of meetings and staff training.
28 December 2017
Your Life (Taunton) provides personal care to people living in their own apartments in an assisted living complex. At the time of the inspection they provided personal care for four people who had minimal care needs.
There were 53 apartments in the assisted living complex. Homeowners’ surveys indicated they lived in a secure environment and were treated with respect. However the inspection relates specifically to the registered activity of personal care delivered to the four people in their apartments.
At the last inspection in September 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Why the service is rated Good:
There were processes and practices in place to keep people safe. People felt safe living in their apartments and with the staff who supported them. People said they enjoyed their independence and felt safe because there was always someone to support them if they needed assistance. One person said “If I need extra help I know it is there.” Another person said “I feel very safe. I don’t have to worry.”
People received effective care and support because staff understood their personal needs and abilities. Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. The provider had a programme of training which ensured staff had up to date guidance and information. People were always consulted fully before any care support commenced.
People said they received support from staff who were always “polite and kind.” One person said “This is a lovely place. You live your own life, do whatever you like but if I want help I can press the button and someone will come and help me. I feel very lucky.” Another person said “I could not wish for anything better. Staff are always very nice. I am happy with everyone.”
Most people living in the apartments were independent and did not require personal care. Staff knew people well. People could be offered the amount of support they required which might be minimal support but made a difference to their well-being.
Support could be offered for a short period of time and discontinued when it was no longer needed for example during acute illness. The service looked for individual solutions to people’s care and support needs.
People and staff were supported by a registered manager who was approachable and listened to any suggestions they had for continued development of the service provided.
There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, ensure staff kept up to date with good practice and to seek people’s views.