We carried out a review of the data available to us about Nottingham Regional Office 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 Nottingham Regional Office, you can give feedback on this service.
Nottingham Regional Office is a Supported Living Service providing personal and nursing care to 12 people, with learning disabilities, autism and other complex needs, at the time of the inspection. 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.
The 12 people, who received personal care, lived in three different shared properties. There were 64 other people, supported by the service, who did not receive regulated personal care. Those people lived in a variety of other apartments and flats.
The type of night time support provided in the shared properties all differed. There was assistive technology equipment in place which meant people could be supported to live more independently.
There was a main office that housed the area manager, six team managers, and administrative staff.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The service was safe. Staff received training in safeguarding and understood their role in reporting concerns to protect people from harm. There were effective risk assessments in place. Recruitment checks were in place to ensure staff were suitable to care for people who used the service. Staff received support and supervision. Infection control procedures were followed to minimise the risk of people acquiring an infection. People were supported to take their medicines in a safe way.
Peoples health care needs were well met, and people were supported to eat and drink. Staff supported people to make choices and decisions about their care. The service had an effective complaints procedure.
Staff were kind and caring. People were treated with dignity and respect. People’s needs were assessed on a regular basis and records were up to date. Staff maintained confidentiality.
People were supported to engage in the community and develop independence. Staff supported people well to avoid social isolation and family involvement was encouraged.
Care planning was detailed and outcomes for people were, staff had an excellent knowledge of people’s needs and preferences. There was good end of life planning.
The service was well-led. Incidents and accidents were analysed for trends and discussed with staff to prevent reoccurrence. Management oversight was good, regular audits took place with feedback to staff. Staff and people had regular meetings to discuss issues and make improvements.
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.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
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.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 24 August 2016).
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 re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
There is a registered manager and she was available during the 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.
Staff knew how to keep people safe and understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. Risks to people’s health and safety were managed and plans were in place to enable staff to support people safely without unnecessary restriction. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s support needs and staff were recruited safely. People received the level of support they required to safely manage their medicines.
Staff received appropriate induction, training and supervision. People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People received the assistance they required with their meals. External professionals were involved in people’s care as appropriate to support them with their health needs.
Positive and caring relationships had been developed between staff and people who used the service. People were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care and making decisions about what care they wanted. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff. People’s independence was promoted by staff.
People received the care they needed and staff were aware of the different support each person needed. Care records provided sufficient information for staff to provide personalised care. People felt able to make a complaint and knew how to do so.
People and their relatives were involved in the development of the service. Staff told us they would be confident raising any concerns with the management and the registered provider was meeting their regulatory responsibilities. There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.
We spoke with four staff about the needs of different people that they cared for. We saw that staff had a good understanding of people's needs and how they met those needs.
Staff were completing medication administration records (MARs) when a person had been observed taking their medication. The MARs that we saw had been fully completed and indicated whether people had taken their medication or not. We saw that an audit of MARs was taking place and, where any gaps in the records was identified, appropriate action was taken to rectify this.
We spoke with five people who were using the service and asked if they were aware of the different ways in which they could provide feedback about the service. One person said, 'I had a survey to fill in a while back.' Another person told us, 'I have raised a couple of issues directly with the manager and they have sorted it.'
People were all aware of how to contact the office should they wish to provide feedback or raise a concern. People told us that they would have no hesitation in raising anything with the manager.
The person using the service we spoke with told us they were happy with the level of support and care they received.
In the care plans we looked at we saw that information received from others had been taken into account. For example information from people's social workers, GP and other healthcare professionals had informed the care plans.
We saw that people using the service had access to the complaints policy within their service user guide. This was also provided in an easy read format.
The people using the service we spoke with told us they were happy any complaints would be dealt with properly.
The people we spoke with told us they felt they were supported with their assessed needs. People also felt they were supported to maintain as much independence as possible.
One person told us how they enjoyed going out on day trips and to the shops with their support workers.