You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 15 January 2019

This was our first inspection of Health Matters. This announced comprehensive inspection took place on the 28 November 2018. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector. The inspection was not undertaken at the providers’ office which is the registered location for this service. We attended the provider’s residential location at Beauchamp Avenue, Birmingham to enable us to meet and speak with people who were using the service, with their consent.

Health matters provides care and support to people living in a 'supported living' settings, so that they can live as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people's personal care and support.

Health matters is also a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own specialist housing. At the time of our inspection it provided a service to two people within its supported living house, and did not provide any services to any other people under their registration as a domiciliary care agency. The people receiving support from the service were living with a range of conditions related to mental health.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of 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. The registered manager was not present for our inspection. The provider’s representative who knew the service well was available throughout the inspection.

People were safeguarded by staff who knew how to recognise and report any concerns. Risks were assessed and suitable control measures put in place, which still enabled people to maintain as much independence as possible. Sufficient staff were in post and the recruitment process for new staff had helped ensure that only suitable staff were employed. People managed their medicines themselves.

People and their relatives told us staff had the appropriate knowledge and skills to meet the needs of the people they were supporting. Staff told us they received the training and skills to do this effectively. People had a varied and healthy diet and enough to eat and drink. Staff worked with other professionals to ensure that people received the health care that they needed. People were given choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate. People were supported and encouraged to use an advocacy service when needed. People made decisions and choices in relation to their care, support received, daily routines that they wished to take part in. There were positive relationships between people and members of staff. Staff promoted and respected people’s independence.

People's care was person-centred and people’s experiences and voice were listened to . Staff enabled people to follow their interests and hobbies. The provider had a system in place to monitor and manage complaints.

Quality assurance systems involved people and led to a safer and better-quality service. People had a say in how the service was run. Staff worked as a team to help people and each other. Quality assurance, audits and spot checks undertaken by the provider helped identify and drive improvements. The registered provider and their staff team worked together with other organisations to ensure people's wellbeing.

Inspection areas



Updated 15 January 2019

The service was safe.

Risks to people had been assessed and measures put in place to keep people safe and respect their independence.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who understood how to protect people from potential harm.

People independently managed their medicines. Systems were in place to ensure this was safe.



Updated 15 January 2019

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet people�s needs effectively.

People told us they enjoyed purchasing their own food and enjoyed preparing meals of their choice independently and or with staff.

People had access to health care and were supported in ways that promoted their physical and mental health.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and people�s rights were protected.



Updated 15 January 2019

The service was caring.

People told us staff were kind and caring in their approach.

People were supported to express their views about how they wanted their care planned.

People were encouraged by staff to maintain their independence. People�s dignity and privacy was respected.



Updated 15 January 2019

The service was responsive.

The service was person centred and responsive and this was reflected in positive outcomes for people.

People were involved in the planning of their care, including their goals and how they preferred to manage their health.

People were supported to engage in person-centred activities which helped them to maintain their hobbies and interests.

There was a complaints procedure in place which was accessible to all people.



Updated 15 January 2019

The service was well-led.

People told us the service was well-led. The service involved people and those who matter to them in a meaningful way.

People and staff spoke highly of the registered provider.

There were robust quality assurance processes in place that reflected the needs of the service.