We carried out a review of the data available to us about Livability Hallgate on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Livability Hallgate, you can give feedback on this service.
Livability Hallgate is a supported living service providing personal care to up to 4 people. The service provides support to people living with a learning disability and/or physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 4 people using the service.
People’s experience of the service and what we found:
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people. We considered this guidance as there were people using the service who have a learning disability and or who are autistic.
Right support.
People were supported and encouraged to maintain their independence, as far as possible. Staff had a good understanding of people’s likes and dislikes and encouraged people to participate in their care. People were encouraged to set simple goals and participate in planning activities and events.
Right care.
People were well cared for and were treated with dignity and respect. Staff spoke knowledgably of the people they supported and spoke fondly about them as individuals. People had good relationships with staff and looked happy and relaxed when being supported. They indicated they enjoyed living at the service and that staffed helped them when they needed support.
Right Culture.
People were supported to be as active and independent as possible. They were encouraged to participate in activities both within the service and outside in the local community. Two people had recently returned from a holiday in Scotland. People were supported to maintain contact with family and friends. Staff supported people to be effective members of the community.
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. We found some minor issues, where a best interests decision had not been fully completed for safety equipment installed to prevent 1 person from falling. We have made a recommendation about this.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (Published 11 July 2018).
Why we inspected
We undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Livability Hallgate on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Recommendations
We have recommended the provider review their best interests processes to ensure they comply fully with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA).
Follow Up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
This was the first comprehensive inspection of the service since it had been acquired by the provider Livability.
Livability Hallgate is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The home accommodates up to five people in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection there were five people using the service.
The care service has been developed in line with the values that underpin the 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.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy
The service had a registered manager. 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.
People using the service were kept safe by staff who understood the personal risks to each person who used the service including living in the home and accessing the community. Staff regularly reviewed these risks and engaged other professionals where people’s behaviour changed.
Medicines were safely administered by staff who were trained and assessed as competent to do so. In keeping with a national initiative called STOMP-LD (Stopping over-medication of people with learning disabilities) staff had worked with people in a very positive way to reduce their need for mood stabilising medicines.
There were enough staff on duty. The registered manager had recruited more staff and were awaiting the completion of pre-employment checks before new staff could begin to work in the home. Prospective staff were required to detail their experience and learning on an application form. Three references were required by the provider to seek information on a person’s character and suitability for the post.
In the absence of having a full staff complement agency staff had been employed in the service. Agency staff received an induction to the service. Staff employed in the service also underwent an induction process and were supported to carry out their roles using supervision, training and appraisals.
People attended a house meeting and had meetings with their keyworkers to enable them to influence how their care was provided and their home managed.
Records showed regular checks were carried out on the building and its contents to ensure people lived in a safe environment.
People’s human rights were protected by staff who promoted their right to family life and access to medical service to promote their health and well-being. Staff enabled people to play an equal part in their home and community.
The service had appropriate systems in place to protect people from harm. Staff had been trained in safeguarding and felt able to discuss any concerns with the registered manager.
The provider had a staff disciplinary policy in place to address any staff behaviour which was not acceptable.
People had their own menu’s in place which reflected their personal tastes. Pictures were available for people to choose their menu for the week before they assisted with shopping.
The service had engaged professionals from different disciplines to support people’s needs and included their advice in people’s care plans.
Staff supported people with kindness and patience. They respected people’s choices and encouraged them to be as independent as possible. When people had made choices, which were important to them staff had advocated on their behalf to their family members about what each person wanted to do.
The home is in the centre of Hexham and is an old building. Staff had made adaptions to the building to meet people’s needs, and when necessary made arrangements for people’s care to ensure the best use of the layout of the space available.
Records in the home were up to date and accurately reflected people’s needs. Care plans and risk assessments provided guidance to staff on to provide each person’s individual care.
Staff encouraged and supported people to be part of their community and continue relationships and activities that were important to them.
The service was well-led. Systems were in place and operated effectively to monitor the quality of the service. There was a culture of continuous improvement embedded in the service.