You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 16 May 2018

The inspection took place on 6 March 2018 and was announced. We gave the service short notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available to support us during the inspection. This inspection was the first inspection since the service was registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 December 2016 as a result of an office move. The previous inspection for this service was undertaken on 18 October 2013, when it was found to be meeting the requirements of the regulations relevant at that time. During this inspection we found the service was meeting the requirements of the current legislation.

This service provides care and support to nine people living in five supported living settings, so 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. There were 31 other people in receipt of a service from the provider, but not in receipt of personal care.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpins Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our 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 demonstrated their understanding of how to deal with allegations of abuse. Systems to record and act on any abuse allegations were in place.

People told us their medicines were managed safely. Medication records had been completed in full. The registered manager discussed their plans to introduce records to document any gaps or refusals of people’s medication.

There was a safe recruitment process in place. The provider demonstrated their proactive approach to recruitment by ensuring people who used the service were actively involved in the interviews of potential staff. There was a detailed and comprehensive training programme in place that supported the development of the staff team in delivering effective care to people.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems of the service supported this practice. All staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and how this related to supporting people who used the service. The registered manager clearly understood the legislation in relation to MCA, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and the Court of Protection. Consent to care and treatment was clearly recorded in the care files we looked at.

Records had been developed with the involvement of people who used the service or family members. Hospital passports were in place that provided information about how to support people in the event of an emergency that required a hospital admission.

People who used the service and relatives told us they were happy with the care they received. People’s likes, needs, wishes and choices were reflected in their care files, which demonstrated they had been involved in their development. There was a varied and detailed activities programme in place, which highlighted the type of activities people were support to take part in.

The care records we looked at were detailed and comprehensive, which reflected the individual needs of people. The care plans clearly supported the delivery of care to people who used the service.

An e

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 16 May 2018

The service was safe.

Systems were in place to investigate, respond to and act on any allegations of abuse.

Medicines were managed safely. Staff had received appropriate training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills in relation to medicines management.

There was a safe recruitment process in place. The provider demonstrated a proactive approach to recruitment by ensuring people who used the service were actively involved in the interviews of potential staff.

Effective

Good

Updated 16 May 2018

The service was effective.

Staff had access to comprehensive training to support them in providing effective care to people.

Records showed that consent had been sought for care and treatment. Records relating to applications to the Court of Protection were in place. This ensured people were not restricted unlawfully.

Records had been developed with the involvement of people who used the service or their family members.

Caring

Good

Updated 16 May 2018

The service was caring.

Good care was provided to people that reflected their choices, likes, needs and wishes.

People were treated with dignity and respect and staff were seen to be respecting their wishes.

Responsive

Good

Updated 16 May 2018

The service was responsive.

There was a varied and detailed activities programme in place.

An effective system of recording and dealing with complaints was seen.

The care records we looked were detailed and comprehensive and reflected the individual needs of people.

Well-led

Good

Updated 16 May 2018

The service was well led.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of service provided.

We saw regular team meetings were taking place that enabled staff to be involved in the operation and delivery of care to people.

We received positive feedback about the registered manager and the leadership of the service.