You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 29 December 2017

The inspection took place on 7 and 9 November 2017 and was announced. The service was registered on 8 September 2016; this was the first inspection of the service.

Transparent Care provides care and support to people living in supported living settings so that they can live in their own home 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. Transparent Care provides a service to adults who have a primary diagnosis of a learning disability to enable them to enjoy an independent life in their own home supported by the services Domiciliary Care Registration. Transparent Care support people in 10 supported living services which are in various areas of the country. We were able to visit one home which was local to us.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

Relatives we spoke with told us they felt their family member was safe and received good care. One relative told us, “The service is absolutely fantastic.” Another comment we received was, “I can’t fault the care [she] receives.” Staff told us the service was good to work for. One member of staff said, “This is a brilliant organisation and is the first job in care that I have worked at that is relatively stress free.”

Staff received training in safeguarding. They told us they would not hesitate to report any concerns they had. We were told that someone was always at the end of the phone if staff wanted to discuss anything.

Safe recruitment procedures were carried out. Files we saw contained relevant documentation required to ensure only suitable staff were appointed. Staff received appropriate induction, training and supervision. Support was on-going and an essential part of continuing development. Staff told us if anyone needs specific support the training was provided. We saw examples of this in the training matrix. For example, sensory loss and vision training was completed by some staff that supported people with sensory loss.

Medicines were managed safely and charts for the administration of medicines were completed. However, PRN protocols were not in place to direct staff. We have made a recommendation regarding this.

Complaints were taken seriously and relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint. An easy read format was available for people who needed this.

The service had effective monitoring systems in place to drive improvements and ensure the safety of people being supported. Personal emergency evacuation plans were in place in the event of an emergency such as a fire.

People had access to healthcare services to maintain good health. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the polices and systems in the service support this practice.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 29 December 2017

The service was safe.

Relatives told us their family member was safe and they knew who to contact if they had any concerns.

Sufficient staff were available to meet people’s needs.

Safe recruitment checks were in place to ensure only suitable staff were appointed.

Effective

Good

Updated 29 December 2017

The service was effective.

Staff acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff had knowledge and training to carry out their role effectively.

People had access to healthcare services to maintain good health.

Caring

Good

Updated 29 December 2017

The service was caring.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion.

People’s dignity was maintained at all times.

Relatives told us staff were kind and caring.

Responsive

Good

Updated 29 December 2017

The service was responsive.

People received care and support in the way they preferred.

People knew how to make a complaint and had information in a format they understood when they first joined the service.

Care plans were reviewed when necessary and when people’s needs changed.

Well-led

Good

Updated 29 December 2017

The service was well led.

The management team inspired staff to provide high quality care.

Effective monitoring systems were in place to improve and monitor the quality of the service.

Relatives and staff told us the service was well managed.