Archived: United Response - Bradford Supported Living Services

The Supported Living Service provide care and support to adults with learning disabilities living in their own homes in the Bradford district. They provide up to 24 hour a day support and also have an outreach service. They aim to support people achieve their goals in their everyday lives both at home and out in the community whilst maintaining their independence wherever possible.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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 told us they felt safe and had no concerns about the way they were treated or supported. Relatives told us they felt their family members were safe and cared for in a respectful way.

Staff were aware of the signs and indicators of abuse and they knew what to do if they had any concerns. We observed people were comfortable and relaxed around staff. We observed that staff interaction with people was friendly, encouraging and caring.

Staff supported people to attend health appointments. There were protocols in place to respond to any medical emergencies or significant changes in a person’s well-being.

We found people’s medicines were managed in accordance with safe procedures and in line with people’s prescriptions.

We noted a number of checks had been completed before staff began working for the service. Staff told us they were not allowed to work until all appropriate checks had been completed.

Staff spoke positively about the way the service was run. Staff told the atmosphere was positive and said they felt well supported. Staff had a clear knowledge of line management and told us they had confidence the service was well led.

Training was planned for the year ahead. The service had a training matrix which identified when refresher training was approaching and who was overdue. The vast majority of staff had completed all mandatory training.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to provide support flexibly. There were systems in place to ensure staff received training, on-going development, supervision and support.

Care plans were developed in consultation with people and their family members. Some care records were not always completed to a consistent level.

People’s risk assessments were completed and these covered a range of issues including guidance around accessing the community and personal safety. People using the service and their relatives expressed positive views about the service and the staff.

The service was acting within the legal framework of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA).

People’s independence was promoted and staff actively encouraged people to participate in activities.

Systems were in place to record, investigate and respond to complaints.

There were arrangements in place to assess and monitor the quality and effectiveness of the service. This included annual surveys, house meetings and medicines administration auditing.

We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full report.

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, their relatives, staff supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. The service managers set the rotas and they take peoples care needs into account when making decisions about numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with and they were involved in the writing of their plans of care. People that used the service told us they give their likes and dislikes on how to be supported. We saw examples of other healthcare professionals involved when needed.

Is the service caring?

People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved were asked to complete an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised, these were compiled together and addressed.

People's preferences, interest and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with peoples wishes. People told us they live their own life and can say, "No" if they wanted.

Is the service responsive?

People are involved in their own care plan reviews and staff were aware of information in people's plans. We saw information received from the feedback survey was placed together and an action plan of recommended outcomes was produced. The provider identified a mix of paper work and files in different locations and is in the process of standardising across the supported living services.

Is the service Well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way. The service has a quality assurance manual for guidance on how to maintain high standards and processes. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and felt that any concerns would be acted on.

The staff we spoke with told us people were well cared for and the support plans ensured they received appropriate support. The staff also told us they had received training and felt confident in the identification and reporting of any safeguarding concerns.

We looked at the records of staff provision at each house where care and support was delivered. We noted there were some vacancies but were reassured staff from a local agency, which was registered with the local authority, had been used to provide consistent staffing. Recruitment was underway and staff had been appointed.

The staff we spoke with had received training and felt confident in the identification and reporting of any safeguarding concerns.

We looked at the records of staff provision at each house where care and support was delivered. We noted there were some significant vacancies but were reassured staff from a local agency, which was registered with the local authority, had been used to provide consistent staffing. Recruitment was underway and staff had been appointed.