You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 February 2018

The inspection took place on 9 January 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice to ensure people were available to speak to us during the inspection.

Eastway Silvertown is registered to provide personal care. They do this by providing care to one person in their own home and by supporting small groups of people to go on holidays. People who use the service have learning disabilities. They had supported a group of four people to go on holiday in April 2017.

Following the last inspection in October 2017 we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do by when to improve the key questions of effective and responsive to at least good. We found the provider had taken clear action to address our concerns about recording of consent and detail in care plans and have no further concerns in these areas.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Relatives spoke very highly about the quality and nature of support received by their family members. Records confirmed care was planned and delivered in a highly personalised way which encouraged people’s independence and celebrated their individuality. The service adhered to best practice guidance around supporting people with learning disabilities in the community and with their healthcare needs. The service was flexible and responded to changes in people’s needs and circumstances. They worked well with other agencies to ensure people received a holistic service.

Relatives told us they trusted the service to keep their family members safe. Staff demonstrated they understood the importance of positive risk taking and encouraged people to try new things in a safe way. People were protected from abuse by systems and knowledgeable staff. People were supported to take medicines as prescribed and there were systems in place to ensure this was managed safely.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Relatives told us staff were given the time to get to know people and build up positive relationships with them. Staff spoke about the people they supported with kindness and compassion. Care plans contained clear information about how people expressed their emotional needs and guided staff in how to respond.

People’s religious beliefs and cultural background were considered within care plans. People’s sexual identity and expression was supported in a sensitive manner.

People were supported to eat and drink in line with their needs and preferences. People were encouraged to be involved in meal preparation.

The service applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and made information accessible to people in formats they could understand. There was clear information about how people communicated their needs and choices. Relatives told us their family member’s choices were respected by the service.

The service had a clear and accessible complaints policy and procedure. There were different ways for people to give feedback, including meetings, surveys and reviews. People’s feedback was listened to and acted upon.

Staff received the training and support they needed to perform their roles. The service ensured they complied with measures to be an equal opportunities employer and made appropriate reasonable adjustments for their staff.

Staff and relatives spoke highly of the registered manager who was described as “The mum of the whole service.” She was approachable and staff and relatives told us she was an effective leader who ensured the values of the organisation were known and adhered to in practice.

There were clear systems in place which involved people, relatives and staff to improve and develop the

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 February 2018

The service was safe. People were protected from abuse by robust systems. Staff were knowledgeable about how to safeguard people from harm.

There were clear plans in place to ensure risks to people were mitigated against.

There were enough staff to support people safely.

People were supported to take medicines and this was managed effectively.

People were protected by the prevention and control of infection.

There were effective systems in place to learn from and respond to incidents.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 February 2018

The service was effective. People's needs were assessed and care planned in line with best practice guidance for supporting adults with learning disabilities.

Staff were given the training and support they needed to perform their roles.

People were supported to eat and drink in line with their needs and preferences.

The service worked with other organisations and healthcare services to ensure people received holistic care and their healthcare needs were met.

People were involved in making decisions about their care. The service followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 February 2018

The service was caring. People and staff had developed positive, trusting relationship based on respect.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff had information about how to identify and respond to people's emotional needs.

People's religious and cultural needs were considered by the service.

The service considered people's sexual identity and expression and ensured sensitive support was in place.

There was a focus on supporting people to develop their independence and staff supported people with this in mind at all times.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 February 2018

The service was responsive. People's care was planned and delivered in a person-centred flexible way.

People's feedback was listened to and acted upon to improve the quality of care.

People were supported to take part in wide range of activities of their choosing.

The service had systems in place to ensure people received sensitive support if they were bereaved.

Well-led

Outstanding

Updated 21 February 2018

The service was well led. The service had a clear vision and values which were well understood by staff. Relatives felt family members were supported in line with the organisation's value base.

Relatives and staff spoke highly of the registered manager. They felt supported and encouraged by her leadership.

There were clear systems in place to maintain and improve the quality of the service.

People, relatives and staff were involved in reviewing and developing the organisation.

The service worked well with other organisations to ensure people received holistic care.