You are here

Creative Support - South Manchester Womens Project Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 12 December 2017

We inspected Creative Support - South Manchester Women’s Project (The Women’s Project) on 19 and 20 September 2017 and this inspection was announced. We gave the provider 24 hours’ notice because the location provided supported living services and we needed to be sure that someone would be in to assist us with our inspection.

South Manchester Women’s Project provides care and support to women with enduring mental health needs. The service is provided across two properties in South Manchester, Amherst Road and Longley Lane. Both premises are close to local amenities and public transport. At the time of this inspection, the service was supporting 14 people in total. Only six people were receiving support in relation to the regulated activity of personal care.

This was the first inspection of this service since it was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in May 2016. There was a manager in post who had been registered with CQC since May 2016. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC 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 told us they felt safe and comfortable in their homes. Recruitment processes in place helped to ensure staff of suitable character were employed. This meant people were protected from the risk of harm in this regard. We have made a recommendation that the service consider an alternative location for personal emergency evacuation plans to help ensure the relevant personnel are able to readily access them in the event of an emergency.

People’s support plans contained relevant and detailed risk assessments which guided staff to support them in a safe way.

Staff had a good knowledge of what safeguarding meant and could describe the types of abuse. They also knew what action to take if they suspected abuse was taking place. This meant staff knew how to respond to potential risks which could affect people’s safety and wellbeing.

There were suitable systems in place to record incidents and accidents. These were actioned in a timely manner and lessons learnt shared within the service. This meant people’s safety was considered and improvements made to help prevent future recurrence.

People told us there was sufficient staff to help them with care needs and leisure activities where needed. During our inspection we saw that staffing levels were adequate to the support needs of people. This meant that people were not put at risk due to inadequate staffing levels.

People were supported to take their medicines safely. Support plans contained detailed and person-centred information about people’s medicines and in some cases information about how the service supported people to administer their own medicines.

There were appropriate health and safety checks in place to ensure a safe environment for the people living there and the staff supporting them. These checks included gas, electrical systems and fire safety equipment.

People told us the staff at the Women’s Project supported them effectively. Staff were able to do this because they received an ample induction and mandatory training to ensure they were competent to carry out their roles. Training areas included food hygiene, safeguarding, manual handling, mental health and diabetes. We saw from training records that additional training in specialist areas such as hoarding disorder could be accessed depending on the need. Hoarding disorder is a pattern of behaviour that is characterized by excessive collection and an inability or unwillingness to discard large quantities of objects that cover the living areas of the home and cause significant distress or impairment. In addition to classroom and e-learning training, the registered manager cascaded any learning they received through training they attended. In addi

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 12 December 2017

The service was safe.

People told us they felt safe at the service and that staff helped to keep them safe.

Staff understood their responsibilities in keeping people safe and protecting them from harm. Risk assessments were person centred, detailed and provided clear direction for staff to manage identified risks and meet people�s individual needs.

Recruitment processes were robust and staffing levels were sufficient to support people safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 12 December 2017

The service was effective.

People told us staff had the relevant skills to do their jobs well. Staff received a good induction and mandatory training and had access to on-going learning opportunities.

Managers and staff were aware of and understood the principles of the mental capacity act. There was an up to date policy in place to guide staff.

People were encouraged to maintain healthy nutrition and hydration, and supported to access health care professionals as required.

Caring

Good

Updated 12 December 2017

The service was caring.

People told us that staff and the managers were kind and caring towards them.

Staff and managers knew the people they supported well and were able to talk about people�s preferences and interests.

People were involved in developing the support they received. They were encouraged to be independent and supported to make their own decisions.

Responsive

Good

Updated 12 December 2017

The service was responsive.

Support plans contained person-centred information that was up-to-date and detailed; this helped staff to understand individuals� needs and to deliver safe and responsive support.

We saw that people had choice in deciding what activities they wanted to participate in and they were supported to attend these.

People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and there was an effective system in place to manage concerns and complaints.

Well-led

Good

Updated 12 December 2017

The service was well led.

The registered manager was well respected by people and staff members.

There was a good system in place for ensuring quality of the service provided was monitored and that the appropriate improvements made when concerns were identified.

Staff were supported in a variety of ways such as monthly team meetings and operational policies and procedures. They felt supported by the registered manager and the provider.