You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 21 September 2018

The inspection took place on 26 June 2018. Livability Southend is a domiciliary care agency which offers personal care and supported living. At the time of our inspection there was 5 people using the service. At our last inspection in September 2015 Livability Southend was known as Barnabas House. The service provided has remained the same but now being provided by a different provider this being Livability.

This service provides care and support to people living in a supported living setting, 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.

The service did not have a registered manager and was being overseen by the locality manager who is a registered manager in a sister service. Recruitment was underway for a new 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.

Staff delivered support effectively and care was provided in a way that intended to promote people’s independence and wellbeing, whilst people’s safety was ensured. Staff were recruited and employed upon completion of appropriate checks as part of a robust recruitment process. Sufficient numbers of staff enabled people’s individual needs were met. Qualified staff dispensed medications and monitored people’s health satisfactorily.

Staff understood their responsibilities and how to keep people safe. People’s rights were also protected because management and staff understood the legal framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The locality manager and staff ensured access to healthcare services were readily available to people and worked with a range of healthcare professionals, such as social workers, community mental health nurses and GPs to implement care and support plans.

Staff were respectful and compassionate towards people ensuring privacy and dignity was valued. People were supported in a person-centred way by staff who understood their roles in relation to encouraging independence whilst mitigating potential risks. People were supported to identify their own interests and pursue them with the assistance of staff. Person centred social activities took place within the service as well as in the community.

Systems were in place to make sure that people’s views were gathered. These included regular meetings, direct interactions with people and questionnaires being distributed to people, relatives and healthcare professionals. A complaints procedure was in place and had been implemented appropriately by the management team.

The service was assisted to run effectively using quality monitoring audits the locality manager carried out, which identified any improvements needed.

Inspection areas



Updated 21 September 2018

The service was safe.

People felt safe at the service. The provider’s arrangements ensured that staff were recruited safely and people were supported by enough staff to meet their needs and ensure their safety and wellbeing.

Risks to people living in the service were well managed.

Medication was managed well and stored safely.



Updated 21 September 2018

The service was effective.

Management and staff had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty, which helped to ensure people’s rights .

Staff received a suitable induction. People were cared for by staff that were appropriately trained to meet their needs. Staff felt supported in their role.

People had sufficient food and drink and experienced positive outcomes regarding their healthcare needs.



Updated 21 September 2018

This service was caring.

Staff were kind and treated people with dignity and respect.

People’s views about their care was taken into account when planning their care and support.

Staff communicated well with people in a variety of ways.



Updated 21 September 2018

The service was responsive.

Care was person centred and met people’s individual needs, records reflected this.

Varied activities were offered, to support people’s social needs. Complaints and concerns were responded to in a prompt manner.


Requires improvement

Updated 21 September 2018

This service was not consistently well-led.

The condition of registered manager had not been met.

The service had an open culture where staff and people living in the service were included and encouraged to participate in aspects of running of the service.

The manager had developed good links with the local community and local services.

The manager provided staff with appropriate leadership and support.

The service had several quality monitoring processes in place to ensure the service maintained its standards.