You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile


Review carried out on 9 September 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Options on 9 September 2021. 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 Options, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 30 July 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Options is registered to provide personal care and support to people in their own homes. The service operates in Bristol, South Gloucestershire, Bath and North East Somerset and North Somerset. The service supports people with a learning disability, brain acquired injury or mental health to live independently or in communal supported living services. Some people received 24 hour support made up of individual hours and shared support living in shared housing.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

There were 12 people receiving personal care at the time of the inspection. There were also 38 other people receiving support services from the agency such as support with social activities but not help with personal care.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found.

People received care that was safe, effective, caring and responsive. People and their relatives spoke positively about the support they received.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent. The service was responsive in this area encouraging people to network and foster positive relationships with not only the staff but other people using the service.

There was sufficient staff to support people who had the necessary skills and commitment to provide care that was person centred. Care was commissioned on a very individualised basis. Staff promoted independence with some people positively reducing their hours of personal care because of the skills they had gained.

People were supported to have choice and control of their life 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. People had information in a way they could understand enabling them to make decisions about the care and support they needed.

People were supported by staff that were caring in their approach enabling them to lead the life they wanted. This included supporting people to keep in contact with friends and family. People were supported to make decisions about their care and the way they wanted to live.

The service was well led. There were systems to check and monitor the quality. This again involved people, staff and family.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published February 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

The overall rating for the service has remained good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.

Follow u

Inspection carried out on 27 January 2017

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 27 January and 2 February 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of our visit. This was because the service provided domiciliary care and support to people and we needed to be sure that people and staff would be able to talk to us.

The service was last inspected in February 2015. There were no breaches of the legal requirements at that time.

Options is registered to provide personal care and support to people in their own homes. On the day of the visit, there were seven people receiving personal care. There were also eighty people receiving other types of support services from the agency.

There was a registered manager for the service. 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.

Risks to people in their daily life were minimised. This was because staff knew what their responsibilities were in relation to keeping people safe from harm. New staff were employed after an in depth recruitment process. Visits were planned so that people received care and support that was safe and met their needs.

Where possible people were matched with staff who it was felt they would get on well with .This was to ensure they felt happy with them. The time and dates of visits was well planned. This meant that there was always enough time to provide safe care. People were supported by staff who were well qualified and competent. The staff team knew people well and this helped to ensure support was consistent for people.

People felt very happy with the care and support that they received from the staff. Their needs were being met effectively by staff who were competent and knew how to meet their needs.

People were supported by staff who were kind and caring in manner. Staff understood how to support people in a respectful and dignified way. Staff always discussed care with people and gained consent before providing support. Staff had a good understanding about people’s needs and preferences, and were knowledgeable about how to effectively communicate with each person they supported.

People were protected from the risks from unsuitable staff because the provider had recruitment procedure in place that aimed to ensure that only suitable staff were employed to work with people.

Support plans were written in an individualised way. They focused on each person’s goals, skills and long term wishes. Support plans were reviewed and evaluated regularly. This was to ensure that the planned care and supported people received was current and up to date.

People were supported with their health care needs and were supported with health and well-being appointments when needed. Staff also supported people to take part in a range of different activities and leisure opportunities.

Information was available about how to make a complaint and relatives said their concerns were addressed properly.

Staff, people who used the service and their relatives said they were easily able to speak with the registered manager. The registered manager carried out regular reviews of the service with people and relatives involvement. Their feedback was used to drive up improvements in the quality of the service people received.