Archived: Positive Opportunities Limited - 83a Sutherland Avenue

Positive Opportunities Limited - 83a Sutherland Avenue, is a supported living service providing personal care to people aged 18 and over with learning disabilities and/or autism. At the time of the inspection, two people were living in a shared house and received personal care.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

There were checks in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service but some were not recorded and so it was unclear how improvements or action needed were identified.

People were comfortable with staff and told us they felt safe at the service. Relatives remarked they felt their loved one’s were safe. Staff understood their roles in safeguarding people from harm.

Risks to people had been assessed and staff knew people well and understood how to manage any risks safely. There was a process to identify learning from accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns.

There were enough staff to support people and safe recruitment practices were followed. Medicines were safely administered and stored. The service had policies and procedures to respond effectively to Covid-19. Staff followed appropriate infection control practices to prevent or minimise the spread of infection.

People's nutritional needs were assessed and supported. Staff worked proactively with health professionals to meet people's health needs. Staff told us they received training and support to meet people's needs.

Staff asked for people's consent before they provided care or support. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice

People were supported by a small consistent staff team who knew them well. Relatives said staff treated people with care and kindness. Staff treated people with dignity, respected their privacy and encouraged their independence. People were now more involved and consulted about their daily care.

People had personalised plans for their care. These were up to date and reflected their needs. They were supported to take part in a range of personalised activities that met their needs. People's needs in respect of their protected characteristics, such as their ethnicity or disability were assessed and supported.

The registered manager understood the requirements of their role and fostered a culture of openness and empowerment. Staff worked in partnership with relatives, health and social care professionals and voluntary organisations. People’s views were sought about the service informally and more formally through surveys to see if there were any areas for improvement needed.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

Right support:

The model of support provided was focused on giving people choice, control and as much independence as possible. People lived in their own shared house in a residential area similar to others in the road, with no distinguishing signs and access to transport links.

Right care:

People and relatives said staff were proactive in supporting people in a way that promoted their dignity, privacy and human rights. People were encouraged and consistently supported to develop and maintain skills and develop confidence. They had their own goals and ambitions which were regularly reviewed with them.

Right culture:

Staff told us that the provider and registered manager was committed to providing opportunities to ensure people using the service could lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives. They had for example previously organised a disco for people with learning disabilities in the area in a local night club.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good. (Report published 21 November 2019).

Why we inspected

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding to test the reliability of our new monitoring approach.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Positive Opportunities – 83a Sutherland Avenue is a supported living service providing personal care to people aged 18 and over with learning disabilities and/or autism. The service can support up to four people living in a shared house. At the time of the inspection, two people were living in a shared house and one person received personal care.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them. The service supported people with learning disabilities and/or autism in line with these principles.

People lived in a house that was situated in a residential area close to the town centre. The house fitted into the residential area and other domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The service was safe. There were procedures to protect people from abuse. Risks associated with their needs were assessed and staff understood how to reduce these risks.

Recruitment procedures were not robustly followed because references for staff were not available. The registered manager took action to follow this up after the inspection and obtain the references. People were supported with their medicines. Staff were trained and competent in administering medicines to people. Staff followed infection control procedures. There was a procedure to review accidents and incidents in the service to prevent reoccurrence.

Staff were supported with training and development to ensure their skills and knowledge were up to date. 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.

People were supported with maintaining their health and nutrition. The service worked in collaboration with health care professionals, such as GPs, nurses and speech and language therapists to ensure their health needs were met.

Staff were kind and caring towards people. They respected people’s dignity and privacy. People were encouraged to be independent and go about their daily lives and routines. Staff understood the importance of promoting equality and diversity. People were supported to maintain relationships and a private life.

People received person-centred care and support. Their care plans were personalised according to their wishes and preferences. People were protected from social isolation. They were supported to pursue activities, hobbies and interests of their choice; including voluntary community work. Staff communicated with people appropriately according to their communication needs. People and their relatives were supported to make complaints if they had a concern or were not happy with the service.

Staff felt supported by the management team. Quality assurance systems included obtaining feedback from people and relatives. The registered manager collated feedback and learned lessons when things had gone wrong to help make improvements to the service.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (report published 16 February 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

Positive Opportunities-83a Sutherland Avenue provides personal care and support for up to three people with learning disabilities with the aim to prepare people to move on to independent living. At the time of the inspection there were two people using the service. There was a registered manager in post. 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.

Safeguarding adults procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard people they supported. There was a whistle-blowing procedure available and staff said they would use it if they needed to.

Risks to people using the service were assessed and risk assessments and support plans provided clear information and guidance for staff.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs. The provider conducted appropriate recruitment checks before staff started work.

Staff received adequate training and support to carry out their roles and staff training was up to date. Staff received regular supervisions and annual appraisals.

The registered manager and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and had access to a range of healthcare professionals in order to maintain good health.

People's privacy, dignity and confidentiality were respected. Staff supported people to be independent where possible such as attending to some aspects of their own personal care.

Staff were knowledgeable about people's individual needs. People were involved in their care planning and the care and support they received was personalised and staff respected their wishes and met their needs. Support plans and risk assessments provided clear information for staff on how to support people using the service with their needs. Support plans were reflective of people's individual care needs and preferences and were reviewed on a regular basis.

The service had complaints system in place to deal with any complaints received and people believed their complaints would be investigated and action taken if necessary.

There were effective processes in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service and the registered manager recognised the importance of regularly monitoring the quality of the service provided.

The registered manager regularly sought feedback from people and staff about the service. People and staff told us they thought the service was well run and that the registered manager was supportive.

The person using the service we spoke with told us that they were happy with the support they receive. 'I am able to do a lot of activities,' they said.

We found that the people living at the home received personalised care and support based on an assessment of their needs. Staff received suitable support and worked with other health and social care professionals to ensure people using the service received safe and effective care. People's care records were up to date and secured safely.

We found that the people living at the home were involved in their care planning and received personalised care and support based on an assessment of their needs. Appropriate checks were carried out to ensure only suitable people were employed and staff received suitable support and supervision.