Turning Point - City of Manchester Learning Disabilities Supported Living

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this service registered in July 2024. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

We reviewed 4 people’s care plans and examined sections of other care plans where we needed to explore specific areas such as epilepsy management or dietary requirements. All plans contained relevant, comprehensive information that enabled staff to deliver individualised, person‑centred care while recognising triggers and strategies to support each person.

Managers reviewed each care plan every six months, or sooner if needed. Staff had full access to care plans on their hand‑held devices, and any updates prompted a notification requiring staff to confirm they had read them.

Care files included photographs showing people engaged in activities, which helped promote understanding and involvement. The manager told us that documents were provided in formats people could understand when required.

Hospital passports were clear and contained detailed information about health needs, behaviours, and the best ways to support individuals.

Families told us they had good relationships with managers and staff and felt listened to, with actions taken to improve people’s lives. One relative told us their family member did not particularly like her previous hairdresser, so a staff member took her to their own hairdresser instead. The person was “thrilled to have a lovely new dresser”. A professional told us that one person’s specific cultural needs had not been met in their previous placement, but this service had met those needs, improving the person’s presentation and confidence

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People’s care records showed that the provider worked closely with other services and proactively sought support, guidance, and further assessments when needed. The manager was committed to ensuring services worked together for people and challenged external practices or decisions when required. A professional told us the manager “Wont rest until the best outcome for the person is achieved”. The manager and staff also worked closely with families to ensure care was joined up. One relative said, “We always work together [registered manager] encourages that”. This collective, advocacy‑focused approach ensured people received the right support, tailored to their individual needs.

Staff and families worked together to ensure all relevant information was available and shared appropriately. Families and professionals appreciated the stable workforce, who knew people well. One relative told us that during a health appointment, “Staff talk with knowledge about medicines, not having to look at bits of paper.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The provider had an Accessible Information policy in place. The Accessible Information Standard required services to identify, record, flag, share, and meet the information and communication needs of people with a disability, impairment, or sensory loss.

People had well‑documented communication care plans that explained any speech or understanding difficulties and outlined the best methods of communication. This ensured staff understood people’s communication needs and provided information in ways individuals could understand.

One person had their own sign language; staff were able to understand this and helped us to communicate with the person using their own language.

The service provided tailored accessible information when required. The providers electronic recording system will soon have an accessible information system attached to aid communication and understanding for people. Each bungalow contained a wallchart with photographs of the staff who would be supporting on each day so that people knew who would be supporting them that week.

Families said they had regular telephone and/or email contact with the service and that information was shared with them quickly.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Staff and managers were hands‑on, visible, and consistently available to people, families, and visitors. Families told us they knew how to raise concerns and felt confident that any issues would be addressed.

Families praised how easy it was to contact the service and said staff always returned their calls. One relative, who did not live within travelling distance of the home, said, “They are good in getting back to me with any results or updates... Also if there are any concerns raised [in hospital], I have been invited to attend online meetings”. Relatives told us they felt able to contact the manager at any time and were confident in the communication they received.

We observed interactions between people, staff, and managers and saw that quieter or non‑verbal people were included through prompts, gestures, eye contact, and supportive body language.

Staff supported people to complete an annual questionnaire about their experience of the service which was used to help assess the quality of the service. Responses showed people felt safe, able to make their own decisions, listened to, and supported in ways that mattered to them.The providers own surveys on people’s experiences confirmed these findings. People’s views were also discussed naturally throughout daily conversations and recorded and reported back to leaders.

If the provider thinks an advocacy referral is required for a person, they will follow the current procedures and request this from the relevant local authority.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service complied with equality and human‑rights requirements by avoiding discrimination, considering the needs of people with protected characteristics, and making reasonable adjustments when required.

The provider and staff knew people well and understood the barriers that could affect their care and support. Plans gave detailed scenarios which could be distressing to the person, such as busy noisy environments and changes to usual routines, and how to support people to ensure better access to care and support.

The registered manager demonstrated strong leadership and advocacy skills, with a firm commitment to promoting access to services and removing barriers to ensure people received good support. These actions led to improved outcomes and an enhanced quality of life for people.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff received training across a range of topics designed to strengthen their understanding of people’s rights. This included autism and learning disability, dementia, diversity, equality and inclusion, and mental health awareness. Staff we spoke with were confident in their understanding of people’s unique and diverse needs and equality‑related issues, and they felt equipped to support people appropriately.

Managers were committed to creating equal opportunities for people who may experience marginalisation, oppression, or discrimination. The service worked hard to achieve positive outcomes in areas that mattered to individuals. By taking time to listen, assess, and understand people and their families, staff were able to adapt their approach to each person to ensure they provided the right level of support and encouragement.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The manager had secured support form an end of life team within the NHS to help train staff in these sensitive matters. People and their families were supported to consider their end‑of‑life wishes. End‑of‑life care plans that were in place and showed highly personalised, thoughtful, and compassionate approaches that reflected each person’s life and preferences.

Bereavement was discussed sensitively when appropriate. People were supported to remember those who had died and were important to them, through special areas of remembrance.