SeeAbility South Gloucestershire Support Service

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this service type of supported living. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 67 (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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were assessed before they received a service from SeeAbility. This was comprehensive and involved the person, their representative and health and social care professionals.

The assessment informed the person’s care and support plan. People’s communication needs were assessed and met to maximise the effectiveness of their care and treatment. Staff were provided with the training to enable them to communicate effectively with people. This included Makaton training and the use of the eye gaze equipment that one person used.

The service had received a positive compliment in respect of how they had supported a person to transition to the service. This included visiting the service and meeting staff, enabling them to make a decision on whether they wanted to move to Bradbury Court.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Nationally recognised tools were used to assess and plan people’s care. People using the service had their nutritional needs assessed where appropriate. Information about people's preferred foods and drinks, food allergies, likes and dislikes were recorded. If any needs were identified with eating or drinking people were referred to the appropriate health care professionals for advice and support.

People were referred to the community learning disability team in respect of guidance to support them with their epilepsy. It was noted that the seizure rescue medicine named on the protocol did not correspond with the person’s present prescribed medicines. The deputy manager said a referral would be made for this to be updated. The manager and the deputy manager reported a good working relationship with the community learning disability team.

Specialist advice was being sought in respect of wound care, and staff were working with a community nurse to devise a social story to help the person better understand the treatment they were receiving and why it was important.

The service had comprehensive assessments in respect of eye health. Within the organisation they had eye champions that could guide people and staff. There was easy read information to enable people to better understand the importance of eye care. A person told us, “They organise opticians every time I blink”.

People’s care met the expectations outlined in the ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidelines in relation to supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people. People had individual care plans tailored to their needs, had access to the local community. People had access to public transport and enabling them to access the local area and further afield. The new manager was working with people to address areas such as goal planning and meeting people’s aspirations. They were addressing the culture concerns in the service ensuring the team were cohesive and had the necessary skills and training to support people.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Feedback from professionals was positive in how the service planned and delivered care. Comments included, “The staff consistently collaborate with me. They maintain regular communication, promptly report any concerns when necessary”, and “The service is proactive in involving relevant professionals, whether from health or social care, when needed”.

The manager described to us how they were organising a review of a person’s care needs to enable them to access the support they needed. This was because the person was experiencing some trauma. Staff were liaising with the community learning disability team and adult social care to ensure the right package of care was in place.

SeeAbility had a positive behaviour team that the service could access to guide them on putting support plans together. From talking with staff and the management team it was evident that restraint was not used in the service and more person-centred approaches were applied.

The provider did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff did not always support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff had recorded in the daily records that a person had eaten 3 packets of crisps in a short space of time. It was not clear whether these were suitable, as this person was at risk of choking or whether safer and healthier options had been considered. The care plan for this person had been updated after the inspection to include the options of soft crisps which could be offered, such as Quavers.

Another person’s diet consisted of mainly carbohydrates with very little fruit or vegetables being offered. This raised concerns about how the staff were promoting healthier eating whilst balancing choice. This was fed back to the management who acknowledged improvements were needed in this area and some staff would benefit from basic cooking classes to ensure people’s cultural needs were being met.

A relative shared some concerns about the dietary intake of their loved one with the manager during the assessment. They also felt that more active exercise could be promoted to help with a healthier lifestyle.

People were involved in planning, shopping and cooking and care plans included details of food likes and dislikes.

Each person had a health action plan about their medical and health needs, so staff had the information needed to help them remain healthy and active. Staff had completed training in recognising the signs of a person being unwell called RESTORE2.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. However, improvements were needed to ensure goals and aspirations were fully recorded and measurable. People’s goals did not fully capture how these were achieved with just a date recorded.

People’s care plans were reviewed annually or as needs changed. People confirmed they had a care review annually. Records were maintained of the reviews and who was involved. The manager told us everyone’s care reviews had either taken place or was planned. A person confirmed they had a review planned in September 2025 with their social worker.

The manager told us they were working with all staff to make improvements to people’s daily records. Whilst some staff were providing clear and detailed accounts that were person centred, some daily entries lacked detail of how the person was supported or whether they had enjoyed a particular activity. This meant that not all care could be reviewed effectively due to the lack of detail in people’s daily records. The manager was working with the team and providing training in this area.

It was positive to hear about a person receiving support that had been supported by staff who strongly advocated for them to have treatment for a health condition. The person said they had nominated the staff involved for an award as they had helped them get the treatment and attended all health care appointments with them. It was evident the staff had played a big part in advocating for the person to receive the treatment and supported them on their road to recovery.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People were encouraged and supported on a daily basis to make decisions about their care. Information in people's care records showed the service had assessed people in relation to their mental capacity. Staff understood their responsibilities with respect to people's choices. Staff were clear when people had the mental capacity to make their own decisions, they respected those decisions. Staff had completed mental capacity training.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. Care plans included information about how staff involved people in making decisions such as ‘providing information in easy read’ or ‘speak slowly, clearly and keep sentences short’.

Where people lacked capacity staff had recorded best interest decisions for personal care, medication and activities. One person was planning to complete an activity that included a large expenditure. A best interest discussion was being planned with their financial appointee and family representative to ensure this was in their best interest.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act. When people receive care and treatment in their own homes an application must be made to the Court of Protection for them to authorise people to be deprived of their liberty where they lack mental capacity. Three people were subject to a Court of Protection order. For 2 of these people the Court of Protection orders had expired in 2022 and 2024 and the documentation for a third person could not be found. The local authority was responsible for making the relevant legal application. The new manager was chasing the local authority for this paperwork.

People had access to advocates, which were arranged by the service and their social workers. An advocate is a person who helps individuals to understand their rights, make informed decisions, and express their views to services or authorities.