Turning Point - City of Manchester Learning Disabilities Supported Living

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service registered in July 2024. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 80 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We spoke with, communicated with, and observed most people who lived in the bungalows. We observed a warm, friendly, and kind environment. People who could communicate verbally told us staff were “kind”. Those who could not communicate verbally were seen engaging positively with staff, displaying relaxed body language, gestures, and facial expressions.

Care plans identified the personal care tasks people managed independently and where they needed support. This approach promoted privacy, dignity, and clear boundaries. Staff and managers consistently knocked and asked permission before entering the bungalows.

Staff knew people very well and understood who and what was important to them and what they enjoyed doing. Staff cared for people, showed genuine interest in their lives, and worked to ensure individuals had the same choices as everyone else and a good quality of life.

We observed staff responding sensitively to people’s needs and providing compassionate support when individuals were upset, asking them if they would like to for a walk and if they wanted to hold their hand. Staff we spoke with told us they committed to ensuring people lived happy lives. One staff member said they “Love to see the service users happy, I love working with them and it’s great to see them having their liberty”.

Relatives praised staff for being caring and kind. One relative told us, “Staff genuinely care and even give me a hug!, They are genuinely nice people and genuinely nice staff.”

Professionals also shared positive feedback about staff interactions and behaviour. One professional told us, “I have always found the staff to be open and welcoming to me,” and “I can see that relationships between staff and residents are good”.

The service collected and provided data on people’s experiences and professional feedback which corroborate the consistently kind and respectful practice described.

The provider treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The provider took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Care and support were tailored to each person and reflected their strengths and abilities. Managers and staff placed strong emphasis on understanding how people’s unique backgrounds and past experiences continued to influence their daily lives. Where historical information was not readily available, the service sought this from a range of sources. This approach enabled a holistic understanding of each person and supported staff to provide personalised and considerate care.

Families told us managers explored people’s behaviours and sought to understand them. One family member said, “When (registered manager) joined the company they asked why (relative) stayed in their room a lot and if it was usual for them?... They had a fear of being away but not now they have worked with them…there has been a massive change and build up in their confidence”.

People were involved in decisions about their home environment. They decorated and furnished their own bedrooms, resulting in unique, personalised spaces. Shared areas contained photos and pictures chosen by people living in the home.

People also helped make wider decisions about their environment. The manager successfully secured funding to develop the outdoor spaces around the bungalows, which had been largely unused for decades. People chose how they wanted the spaces redesigned, and these changes were implemented. The front outdoor space was developed for communal events and had become a popular area, especially in the summer. During this assessment, work began on the back and side gardens to create a moonlight sensory garden—a communal, fully accessible space designed according to people’s preferences.

Each month one person and one staff member contributed to the service’s own magazine, sharing their interests, talents, and favourite things, this reinforced people’s strengths, personalities, individuality and offered insight into their lives.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff supported people to increase their independence and develop life skills. Daily support included dedicated time to help people progress their goals and independence. People told us they shopped for themselves with staff support, cleaned their homes, completed their own laundry, and chose their activities and daily plans. Staff understood people’s abilities and worked to maintain or further develop them. One relative said staff “do encourage (person) to do things for themselves in kitchen, and up to a certain level is fine. Staff and managers, they always pick up phone and talk things out, there is a fine line between safety and independence, we talk things out and find a solution”.

People were supported to make their own decisions and choices, including decisions about holidays. Staff worked hard to uphold these choices and ensure people had opportunities to enjoy meaningful experiences.

Staff also supported people to maintain friendships and family relationships. Relationships that people wanted with family members were encouraged. Relatives who visited regularly told us they were able to visit whenever they wished and were always made to feel welcome.

The provider was exceptional in how they listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff consistently prioritised people’s needs. They anticipated, recognised, and responded to those needs, paying close attention to signs and subtle cues from people who were unable to communicate verbally.

Staff were supported by detailed Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) care plans and a PBS policy that provided clear guidance and direction.

People’s care plans contained very detailed information about their needs and how they might present when experiencing discomfort, pain, or distress. Known and predicted triggers for certain behaviours were recorded, along with clear strategies for supporting the person and others, including what staff should explain to members of the public if ever required. Staff described the signs that indicated when someone might become unwell or agitated and knew when to escalate concerns. They had access to managers at all times through a 24‑hour on‑call system.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Senior staff and managers were supportive, approachable, and attentive to staff wellbeing. They were fully involved in the service and spent part of their day carrying out the same duties as other staff, leading by example. The registered manager strongly promoted anti‑discriminatory and anti‑oppressive practice for both people supported and staff, within the workplace and in the wider community. The service was actively involved with local stakeholders in addressing and challenging discriminatory practices and supporting inclusion for all.

Overall, staff expressed strong appreciation for managers’ support and guidance. However, a minority felt they needed more support for themselves or when training newer members of staff. Some staff also told us they did not always receive breaks. The provider was aware of this and is due to move to a new office space with a breakout room for all staff to use. The manager has taken seriously all staff comments and new buddy system and reiteration of support for all staff is being discussed. Two managers had open slots in their calendars where staff could call with any matter they wanted to discuss.

Staff said they valued being part of a larger organisation and the benefits this brought, such as access to specialist services for advice and support. One staff member told us their working pattern had been adjusted to meet their needs, and another told us the organisation was supporting them to gain a separate professional qualification outside of the usual training programme.

The service recognised and valued staff contributions through nominations and annual awards.