We carried out a review of the data available to us about Elevation Care Services on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Elevation Care Services, you can give feedback on this service.
Elevation care services is a domiciliary care agency who are registered to offer support to; Children 0-18 years, younger and older adults, people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, mental health and physical disabilities.
It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. Not everyone using Elevation received personal care. At the time of our inspection, 20 people were receiving 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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
We made a recommendation for medicine management due to issues relating to the medicine administration record. Staff had been trained in medicine management and had their competencies checked.
Staff had completed training in line with the company policies and procedures, however not all staff had completed refresher training. The registered manager agreed to ensure all staff required were booked on refresher training as soon as possible.
Staff had completed safeguarding training for both adults and children and knew how to report and record and concerns.
People told us they felt safe with staff and that staff knew them well and completed care in line with their wishes and needs. Staff turned up on time and people knew which staff were coming to support them.
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.
Staff had been recruited safely and had all the relevant checks in place before they started with the service. New staff completed an induction and training schedule before completing lone working.
Care plans and risk assessments were detailed and kept up to date. Details of people’s preferences, choices, likes and dislikes was well documented to ensure staff knew how to support the person well.
Staff supported people to access healthcare services and made referrals as appropriate to the relevant professionals such as, occupational therapy, speech and language therapy, GP’s and district nurses.
People and relatives told us that staff were kind and genuinely caring towards the people they supported. People and relatives had a good relationship with staff and communication worked well.
Staff respected people’s right to privacy and promoted people to be as independent as possible.
People’s communication needs were known by staff and the registered manager provided documentation in different formats to meet people’s needs.
Audits and spot checks were regularly completed to improve the quality of care being delivered. People, relatives and staff were asked for feedback on the service via surveys and meeting.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
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 requires Good (published 14 March 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
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.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained good.
People were kept safe from avoidable harm and abuse. Staff had been provided with training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse; and felt confident in how to report them. Risk assessments were in place to promote people’s safety and they were regularly reviewed. The service’s recruitment process ensured that sufficient and suitable staff were employed to care for people safely. Systems were in place to ensure people’s medicines were managed safely.
Suitable support and training was provided to staff to care for people appropriately. People’s consent was gained before assisting them with care and support. Staff supported people to maintain a balanced diet and to access healthcare facilities when required.
Positive and caring relationships had been developed between people and staff. This ensured that people felt that they mattered; and the staff approach was consistently positive. People were able to express their views and make decisions about their care and support needs. Staff ensured that people’s privacy, dignity and independence was respected and promoted.
People’s needs were assessed prior to them receiving care and support. This ensured that the care provided met their needs. Complaints were managed appropriately in line with the provider’s complaints procedure.
The registered manager and senior staff at the service demonstrated that the culture was transparent, positive and inclusive. A variety of audits were undertaken and used to drive improvement.
This inspection took place on the 30 July 2015 and was announced.
Elevation Care Services is a supported living service which provides care and support to people who may have a range of care needs. These include learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorders.
At the time of this inspection the service was supporting three people across two separate houses.
A registered manager was 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.
People felt safe and staff had been provided with training to recognise the signs of potential abuse or harm.
There were processes in place to manage identifiable risks and to ensure people’s freedom was not restricted unnecessarily.
There were sufficient numbers of staff employed with the right skills and knowledge to meet people’s assessed needs and to promote their safety.
Recruitment checks were carried out on new staff to ensure they were suitable to work with people who used the service.
There were systems in place to ensure people received their medicines appropriately and at the prescribed times.
Staff had been provided with the appropriate training to carry out their roles and responsibilities.
The service worked to the key principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. When required capacity assessments were undertaken if it was found that people could not make decisions about their care and support.
People chose what they wished to eat and drink; and staff supported them with food shopping and cooking.
People were registered with a GP and if required had access to health care facilities.
Staff treated people with kindness and compassion. They were enabled to express their views and their privacy and dignity were promoted.
People were assessed to ensure that the service could appropriately meet their needs.
There was a complaints procedure which was written in an appropriate format to enable people to raise concerns if they needed to.
We found that notifications had not been submitted to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in line with requirements.
There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the care provided, which was used to drive continuous improvements.