You are here

Turning Point - Hampshire Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

This announced inspection took place on 7, 11 and 13 September 2018.

Turning Point Hampshire provides care and support to people living in four different '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. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 10 people with their personal care needs. The service supported people living with learning disabilities, autistic spectrum disorder, physical disability, sensory impairment, older people and younger adults.

At the time of inspection the service had an interim manager who 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. Prior to the completion of this report the CQC registration process had been completed and they will be referred to as the registered manager throughout this report.

The registered manager was supported by two supported living service managers who managed two supported living settings each. These settings were located in the north and south of Hampshire respectively. The services in each area were close enough to provide mutual support whenever required.

In March 2017, Turning Point Hampshire began to provide the supported living service, having taken over from another care provider. Some people and staff experienced a process where their respective contracts, either for services delivered or terms and conditions of employment, were moved from another care provider.

People, relatives, staff and professionals consistently provided feedback that this transfer initially had had a negative impact on the quality of care and support people received. In 2018 the management structure of the service was reorganised and a new management team were appointed. Feedback from people, relatives, staff and professionals consistently reported that there had been significant improvements in the quality of care people experienced and an up serge in team morale, since the appointment of the new management team.

Safeguarding professionals consistently reported there had been a significant improvement in the service performance relating to unsafe care, which was now quickly recognised and responded to effectively. When concerns had been raised the provider had carried out thorough investigations, in partnership with local safeguarding bodies.

Risks to people's safety had been identified and management plans gave staff the required guidance to manage these risks. Staff understood people’s risk assessments and the action required to keep people safe.

The management team completed regular staffing needs analyses which ensured there were always enough suitable staff deployed, with the right mix of skills to deliver care and support to meet people’s needs safely. The provider completed relevant pre- employment checks to assess the suitability of prospective staff to support people using the service.

Staff managed prescribed medicines consistently and safely, and involved people and their families, where appropriate, in regular medicines reviews and risk assessments. Staff maintained high standards of cleanliness and hygiene in people’s homes, which reduced the risk of infection.

Staff had completed the provider’s required training, which had been refreshed regularly to keep their knowledge and skills up to date. Where people had more complex needs staff training was developed and tailored around their individual needs.

Staff applied their learning effectively in accordance with best practice, wh

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was safe.

Staff had developed positive and trusting relationships with people that helped to keep them safe.

Staff supported people to manage risks to their safety, whilst promoting their independence.

There were enough suitably skilled staff deployed to meet people's needs safely.

People's medicines were managed safely by staff who had their competence to do so regularly assessed.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was effective.

Staff received appropriate training, supervision and support to ensure they had the required skills and experience to enable them to meet people's needs effectively.

People were supported to make their own decisions and choices and their consent was always sought in line with legislation.

People were supported to eat a healthy, balanced diet of their choice, which met their dietary requirements.

People were supported by staff to maintain good health, had regular access to healthcare services and received on-going healthcare support when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was caring.

People were consistently treated with dignity, respect and kindness.

Staff consistently treated people as individuals and quickly responded to their changing needs.

People and their relatives were actively involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was responsive.

People were supported to develop and maintain relationships with people that matter to them to avoid social isolation.

The provider used feedback, concerns and complaints as an opportunity to learn and drive continuous improvement of the service.

People and their families were actively involved in planning and making decisions about their end of life care.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was well-led.

The management team consistently demonstrated the skills, knowledge, experience and integrity required to provide clear and direct leadership.

The registered manager encouraged open communication with people, their family, friends, staff and other stakeholders, taking account of their protected and other characteristics.

The provider had effective quality assurance processes and the registered manager monitored and reviewed the delivery of care against good practice guidance..