Rehability UK Berkshire

Rehability UK is a supported living service which provides support to up to 12 people who live with a learning disability in their own flats. There is an office on the same site as the flats from where the service is managed. Staff provide an overnight ‘sleep in’ service at the location.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of the inspection there were 8 people living in the flats, 4 of whom were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of right support, right care, right culture.

Right Support:

Staff supported people to engage in their preferred activities to enable them to lead fulfilling and meaningful everyday lives. People had a choice about their living environment and were able to personalise their rooms. Staff communicated with people in ways that met their needs. Staff supported people with their medicines in a way which met their health needs.

Right Care:

People's care, treatment and support plans reflected their range of needs to promote their wellbeing and enjoyment of life. People’s care plans contained personalised risk assessments which supported people to take positive risks.

Right Culture:

People received good quality care, support and treatment because staff worked with specialists to meet people’s needs. Staff knew people well and supported them to live a life of their choosing. Staff continually acted as advocates for people to promote positive outcomes for them.

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 9 August 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service and the length of time since the last inspection.

For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has remained good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Rehability UK Berkshire on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

The service had a registered manager. However, they were currently managing another of the provider’s services and were not present during the inspection. Another manager had been appointed and was managing the day to day running of the service. They had applied to become the 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 were safe. Systems were in place to assess and manage risks to people, visitors and staff. Health and safety checks were conducted to ensure the safety of the premises and the environment. Staff knew how to safeguard people and report any concerns.

A robust recruitment procedure was in place and helped to ensure suitable staff were employed at the service to support people. People received their medicines safely and when they required them.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. Staff received training and were supported in their role by regular one to one supervision meetings. Annual appraisals were conducted and included opportunities for staff to discuss their future development needs. Team meetings were held regularly for staff to discuss matters relevant to the service and the people they supported.

Staff gained people’s consent before providing support and care. People’s right to make decisions was protected and when necessary decisions were made in their best interests.

People were supported to remain as healthy as possible. Healthcare advice was sought and followed appropriately. Regular reviews of people’s health and wellbeing were undertaken.

People were supported to maintain a healthy diet. Staff supported them to choose and purchase a variety of nutritional foods. When necessary people’s nutritional intake was monitored to ensure they had sufficient to eat and drink.

People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They and their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing decisions about their care. Staff were kept up to date with information related to the changing needs of people they supported.

There were positive interactions between people and staff. People were relaxed in the company of staff who we saw were able to interpret people’s needs through an understanding of their personal communication methods.

People were supported in a variety of activities that were available for people to take part in. These were based on their personal preferences and assessed needs.

Feedback was invited from people, relatives and professionals to help assess the quality of the service and assist in its development. A complaints procedure was available which people and their relatives were aware of.

We found an open culture in the service. Staff and relatives thought the service was well-led and managed. Staff were comfortable to approach the manager for advice and guidance. They felt they worked together as a team for the benefit of the people they supported.

The quality of the service was monitored by the manager and provider through a system of audits and reviews.