We carried out a review of the data available to us about FitzRoy Support at Home - Nottinghamshire on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about FitzRoy Support at Home - Nottinghamshire, you can give feedback on this service.
Fitzroy Support at Home – Nottinghamshire, is part of a national charity. It provides care and support to people living in their own homes and in supported living tenancies. It supports people with a wide range of needs, including people with a learning disability, autism, complex physical needs and mental health needs. It also provides an outreach service.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were complimentary about the service and its staff. People who used the service and relatives told us staff were caring and kind. We saw that staff had developed close relationships with the people they supported. People’s dignity and privacy were respected and staff helped people set goals and encouraged them to increase or maintain their independence.
There was a positive workplace culture. Staff told us they enjoyed their job and were proud to work for the organisation. They said they felt listened to and supported by the management team.
Staff and management were well trained and had the support and supervision they needed to carry out their roles to a high standard.
Staff were aware of how to report any concerns about neglect or abuse and were confident they would be addressed. There were systems in place to ensure only staff who were suitable to work with vulnerable people were recruited.
People were supported safely and risks regarding their care were assessed and met. Staff took measures to prevent and control the spread of infection. There were systems in place for the safe management of medicines so that people received their medicines as prescribed.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
There were quality assurance processes in place and information from accidents, incidents, complaints, audits and feedback was used to drive improvement.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The rating at the last inspection of this service was good (report published March 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service had two registered managers in place at the time of our inspection. 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 were supported by staff who understood the risks people could face and knew how to make people feel safe. People were encouraged to be independent and risks were mitigated in the least restrictive way possible.
People were supported by consistent staff who they knew. People were provided with the support they needed to take their medicines as prescribed.
People were provided with the care and support they wanted by staff who were trained and supported to do so. Any deprivation of a person’s liberty was reported to the appropriate authority to consider if an application needed to be made to the Court of Protection.
People were supported by staff who understood their health needs and ensured they had sufficient to eat and drink to maintain their wellbeing.
People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was protected. Where possible people were involved in making decisions about their care and support.
People were able to influence the way their care and support was delivered and they could rely on this being provided as they wished. They were supported to have the social life they wanted and try new activities. People were informed on how to express any issues or concerns they had.
Systems used to monitor the quality of the service did not always identify where improvements were needed.
People who used the service and care workers were able to express their views about the service which were acted upon. The management team provided leadership that gained the respect of care workers and motivated them as a team.