You are here

Dimensions Luton Domiciliary Care Office Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 10 January 2020

About the service

Dimensions Luton supports people who live in supported living services located in Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Cambridge, and Buckinghamshire. The service was supporting 76 people with the regulated activity of personal care.

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

We found some shortfalls with how the service was being monitored and assessed by the registered manager and the provider.

People’s relatives felt confident that people were safe in the care of staff and the service. There were good processes and systems in place to protect people from the potential risk of abuse and respond to incidents. People had risk assessments and care plans which guided staff about how to meet people’s needs. There were sufficient staff to support people and respond to their needs. People received their medicines. People’s mood controlling medicines were being managed in a way to reduce the use of these. Staff knew how to promote good hygiene in people’s homes.

Professionals spoke highly of the staff in terms of their knowledge and motivation to keep people healthy. Relatives were confident that people’s health was monitored carefully, and GP’s and other health professionals were contacted when it was needed. There were good plans to enable staff to support people who had complex needs when eating and drinking. Staff were knowledgeable about what people liked to eat and drink.

Staff were satisfied about the training they received. They felt supported by their line managers and felt comfortable about seeking direction and raising issues with them. Specialist training was proved when this was needed. Staff knew how to promote choices for people.

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.

Relatives felt staff were caring and respectful with people. Staff had a good understanding about the importance of forming caring relationships with people and to involve them in their day to day care.

Care was arranged so people’s needs were met by a regular group of staff who knew them well. People saw regular staff to promote people’s wellbeing and their need for routine. Staff supported people to fulfil their interests.

The service was making plans with people in regard to some aspects of their end of life needs, but these did not always include people’s wishes and wants at this part of their lives. We made a recommendation about this.

People would be asked their views in their yearly reviews. However, these were often late, and the service had not considered other ways of gaining people’s views of their care. Reviews often lacked details about people’s experiences or future goals. We made a recommendation about this.

There was a good culture in the staff team who spoke about putting people first and supporting them to live happy lives.

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, in

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.