You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 9 January 2018

During a routine inspection

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 carried out on 28 October 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 28 October and 3 November 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours notice as they are registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. We needed to be sure that someone would be in the office to speak to us.

Eastway Silvertown provided personal care to people with learning disabilities while they were on holiday. At the time of our inspection they had supported one holiday which four people had attended. They also supported one person to receive care in their own home as part of their outreach service. This was their first inspection.

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.

People and their relatives had been involved in the development of the service and the planning to go on holidays. Through the use of person centred planning meetings individual care plans with a high level of personalisation had been created. However, there was insufficient detail regarding support required with care tasks in people's homes and on holiday. We have made a recommendation about including care tasks in person-centred plans.

Group meetings for people going on the holidays had been used to ensure people were involved in making decisions about activities, menu planning and other aspects of the holidays.

Although records clearly showed that people had been involved in the planning of holidays and care, the service had sought consent from relatives without ensuring they had the legal authority to consent on their behalf.

The service had completed robust risk assessments for individual risks and for all group activities. The measures in place were clear for staff to follow and were not overly restrictive of people. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding adults from harm and the service had robust processes to ensure that people were protected from abuse.

People had complex health needs and were supported to take their medicines by staff. Records showed this was managed in a safe way. People had comprehensive plans in place regarding their health needs including detailed guidance on how to respond to health emergencies.

Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported. Relatives told us the strength of the relationships helped ensure people had a good time on the holidays. Staff knew the people they were supporting well.

People had been supported to take photographs and videos of themselves as a record of their support. Staff had supported people to make a holiday diary when they returned home. However, the service had not maintained records of care delivered. We have made a recommendation about keeping records of care.

Staff spoke highly of the training provided by the service. Records showed that staff receiving specialist training to assist in the development of their roles. Staff had not received supervision in line with the provider’s policy. We have made a recommendation about staff supervision.

Relatives and staff spoke highly of the registered manager and the senior management of the provider. There had been a high level of management support available during the holidays. Management evaluated the quality and experience of the service and made plans for improvement.

We found one breach of the regulations. You can see what action we asked the provider to take at the end of the full version of this report.