SeeAbility South Gloucestershire Support Service

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 type of supported living. This key question has been rated requires 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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People had a number of goals they were working towards. One person had a goal to go away on holiday with two friends, but this lacked any information on where they went and for how long. This particular goal was recorded as achieved in 2024. There were no other goals identified for this person. Another person’s goal was to gain access to their finances. There was no break down on how this was going to be achieved or any detail on what the person wanted. There were no other goals identified for this person. This meant people’s achievements could not be celebrated or the journey they had been on recognised. The provider’s action plan had identified this as an area for improvement and the manager was in the process of reviewing this with people and their representatives to ensure goals were person centred and relevant.

People’s care plans were tailored to the individual and were person centred. They included important information to enable staff to support people in a person-centred way based on their wishes. People confirmed they were involved in their care planning process.

A member of staff told us, “The care plans and risk assessments are clear and accessible, which allows me to understand the needs of each individual and provide safe and effective support”. This was echoed by other staff we spoke with.

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 were supported to access and feel part of their local communities. Care plans described people’s individual health and care support needs and the health and social care professionals that were involved in their support. Some people attended a local disco enabling them to meet up once a month with other people with a learning disability. Another person told us about their day centre, where they enjoyed doing a variety of activities and enabled them to meet up with friends.

People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends. People confirmed they were supported to visit family. Relatives confirmed they were involved and could visit when they wanted. A relative told us, “When I visit all staff welcome me with open armsand are so friendly towards me. It's like an extendedfamily feeling to me”.

The manager was reviewing people’s care needs to ensure they were supported by staff that were familiar and knew them well. People were allocated a core group of staff to ensure continuity. Improvements were needed to ensure all staff were trained to support people. For example, to ensure staff had received training based on the support needs of the people. This was being implemented to ensure there was continuity for people along with the ongoing recruitment meaning less agency staff would be required.

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

The provider was aware of their responsibilities in relation to the Accessible Information Standard. This standard expects providers to have assessed and meet people's communication needs, relating to a person's disability, impairment or sensory loss and support them as they move from one service to another.

The provider had made available relevant information in different formats, including large print and in pictorial format for people who wanted and needed this. People had a service user guide which clearly described the expectations of the service, key contacts and what to do if they were concerned.

The manager described to us how they were planning to use easy read documents to support people with meeting their health care needs and working towards a healthier lifestyle with meal planning. They were in contact with a local care provider network and exploring how this could be delivered to support people with healthier eating.

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.

People confirmed they knew how to raise concerns with the provider and external agencies including the local authority and the Care Quality Commission. It was evident that improvements were needed to ensure people were being listened to, as described in the safe key question. The new manager was addressing this to ensure people were listened to and concerns were actively acted upon.

A person told us they had care reviews where they could discuss any concerns. One person said, “There has been so many managers, but it is getting better now”. They said they now felt listened to. They told us they completed an annual survey enabling them to express their views of the service.

There were no regular meetings for people to raise concerns or make suggestions for improvement within the service. When we visited on day 3 the manager had scheduled monthly meetings for people and their relatives. The manager was planning for these to be held in person but was aware due to travelling distance some relatives may prefer to join via a video call.

One person told us about a meeting called ‘Taking Control’ they attended that was organised by the provider. They were a representative for the SeeAbility South Gloucestershire Support Service. This enabled them to keep up to date with the wider picture of SeeAbility and meet other people using services across the country making suggestions for improvement. Minutes were available in easy read and covered topics such as keeping safe, voting and healthier lifestyles.

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

Staff worked closely with a range of professionals to ensure all care and support was joined up. They worked closely with the local GP surgery and other health and social care professionals. Timely referrals were made to ensure people had access to the treatment they needed.

Some people had experienced trauma from visiting health care establishments and adjustments had been made for the GP to visit them in their own home. This ensured people got the support they needed when unwell or needed a medical review.

Staff passionately advocated for people to have the treatment they needed working alongside other professionals. This led to a person accessing the treatment they needed when health professionals saw a barrier due to the person had a learning disability. Staff proactively engaged with professionals to ensure the person received the treatment they needed. This had led to positive outcomes for the person.

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 understood the needs of autistic people and people with a learning disability and the barriers that could be faced.Staff had completed training on supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people.

One person told us that when they went out, they needed to ensure the venue/location was wheelchair accessible including access to toilet facilities. Staff understood the importance of this for this person and others using the service. Staff had supported people to obtain bus passes and parking permits to enable them better access to local areas and places of interest.

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 told us that no one was receiving end of life care, but people were asked if they wanted to discuss their plans for this stage of their life. One person had completed an end-of-life care plan involving family, whilst others had chosen not to complete this. The manager confirmed this would be kept under review in consultation with the person and their family.

One person told us they were being supported to look for alternative accommodation enabling them to live on their own. The management team were working with their social worker to help this happen.