You are here

Archived: HF Trust - Bedfordshire DCA Good

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 December 2016

This inspection visit took place on 8 November 2016 and this was followed by telephone interviews with people who used the service, their relatives and members of staff on 10 and 11 November 2016. The visit was announced as we needed to be sure that somebody would be in the office.

At the time of our inspection the service provided personal care and support for up to seven people with a learning disability within a supported living scheme. People lived in separate accommodation within a small radius of each other. Some of the accommodation was rented, but one person owned their home. Only two people were being supported with personal care.

The service had a registered manager but their registration had been cancelled the day before our inspection as they had taken up a new post in the provider’s organisation. A new manager had been appointed and had made an application to become registered. 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. The former registered manager had continued to support the service throughout the new manager’s induction period.

People had been involved in determining the level of support that they required and how this was to be provided to them. Regular reviews were held with people by staff with key responsibility for their support to ensure that the support provided continued to meet their needs.

People were safe and the provider had effective systems in place to protect them from harm. They were supported to access other healthcare professionals to maintain their health and well-being and were encouraged to be as independent as possible. They were assisted to maintain their interests and hobbies and to develop new skills. They were aware of the provider’s complaints system and information about this and other aspects of the service was available in an easy read format. People were encouraged to contribute to the development of the service and to develop links with the local community.

Staff were well trained. They understood and complied with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). They were supported by way of regular supervision and appraisal. They were caring and promoted people’s privacy and dignity. Staff were encouraged to contribute to the development of the service and were aware of their roles and responsibilities.

There were effective complaints and quality assurance systems in place.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 December 2016

The service was safe.

Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures to enable them to keep people safe.

Risk assessments were in place and reviewed regularly to minimise the risk of harm to people. Staff supported people to manage their medicines safely.

Emergency plans were in place.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 December 2016

The service was effective.

Staff were well trained and were supported by regular supervision and appraisal.

Consent was obtained before support was provided.

The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 December 2016

The service was caring.

Staff were friendly and caring.

People�s privacy and dignity were protected.

People were supported to maintain their independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 December 2016

The service was responsive.

Staff were aware of people�s needs because there were detailed care plans in place for each person.

People were supported to follow their interests and to develop new skills.

People were encouraged to contribute to the running of the service.

Comments and complaints were responded to appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 December 2016

The service was well-led.

The management was supportive and approachable.

The provider had an effective system for monitoring the quality of the service they provided.

People�s records were stored securely.