You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Inadequate

Updated 4 December 2020

About the service

Waterside House is a supported living service providing personal care to people aged 18 and over with learning disabilities and/or autism provided by Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council. The supported living service provides supported accommodation to 22 people in seven supported living accommodation properties.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

Safeguarding processes were not effective, and people were put at potential risk of harm due to the poor management of safeguarding concerns. There had been some safeguarding events at the service which had prompted us to inspect. As a result of the number of safeguarding allegations the commissioners have placed Waterside House in a temporary suspension of new admissions to the service.

The provider's initial response to concerns raised has provided a level of assurance. We have been provided with an extensive action plan following our inspection, where the provider in some cases has taken immediate action.

The provider's incident management policies and procedures were not routinely followed. Opportunities to learn from incidents were missed, due to a lack of reporting systems in place. There was a closed culture where staff were reluctant to use the provider's whistle blowing procedure.

One of the supported living settings we visited we found two potential hazards to the environment. Risk assessments concerning these environmental risks had not been completed to minimise risks to people.

The providers approach to COVID-19 was inconsistent. The risk to staff and people using the service from COVID-19 had not been adequately assessed in a timely manner, with measures introduced to reduce the risk. The use of face masks to be worn by staff had only recently been introduced and key internal policies and procedures had not been devised in a timely manner to support to prevention of COVID-19 entering people’s homes. Shortly after the inspection safe systems were implemented.

The management of the service was not cohesive. The organisational structure was not followed, and reporting lines were unclear. Systems were disorganised and audits we requested had not been forthcoming in a timely manner due to this. The service was unable to demonstrate any analysis of themes and trends or how learning was shared with the staff team to ensure continuous improvement. The provider was looking to recruit a quality assurance manager that would support the service with the necessary improvements.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right support, right care, right culture is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

The service was not able to demonstrate how they were meeting some of the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture. There was a poor staff culture within a small number of the supported living settings which meant people were vulnerable to the risk of safeguarding incidents. Whilst the management team had completed some investigations into concerns about this culture, not all allegations were investigated appropriately or reported to the senior management team.

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 was good, the report was published on 6 December 2019. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Waterside House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Why we inspected

The provider contacted us to state they had raised several safeguarding concerns, some of which had not been reported in a timely manner. As a result, we undertook a focussed inspecti

Inspection areas

Safe

Inadequate

Updated 4 December 2020

The service was not safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 4 December 2020

Caring

Good

Updated 4 December 2020

Responsive

Good

Updated 4 December 2020

Well-led

Inadequate

Updated 4 December 2020

The service was not well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.