Archived: West Kent Housing Association

Updated 28 September 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 6 September 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a supported living service. We needed to be sure that someone would be in the office and that people were given notice in case they wanted to speak with us. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before our inspection we looked at notifications that were sent to us by the registered manager and the local authority to inform us of significant changes and events. We also reviewed our previous inspection report, and the Provider Information Return (PIR) that the registered manager had completed. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with two people who received care from the service. We spoke with the registered manager and the provider. After the inspection we spoke with a health and social care professional and two care staff. We looked at eight people’s care plans and the associated risk assessments and guidance. We looked at a range of other records including all five staff recruitment files, the staff induction records, training and supervision schedules, and quality assurance surveys and audits.

The service was last inspected in August 2015 where there were no concerns identified and the service achieved an overall rating of “good.”

Updated 28 September 2017

West Kent housing association is a supported living service. They provide care and support to people with mental health needs or learning disabilities in their own homes. At the time of inspection the service was supporting 13 people with the regulated activity of personal care.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and who had taken time to build positive trusting relationships with them. Staff understood their responsibility in keeping people safe and worked with people to develop skills which helped them to protect themselves and stay safe.

People were involved in managing their own risks. Staff gave them the support and information they needed to choose how risks were managed and how much involvement staff should have. People were supported to make their own decisions and remain as independent as possible. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible.

People told us that the staff who supported them understood their needs and always listened to them. People planned their own care and were able to plan the time or focus of their support at short notice. They could use their time with staff to carry out tasks, undertake activities or have emotional support. Staff often stayed with people over their allotted time if people were distressed or needed extra support. Staff treated people with respect and asked people before they carried out any tasks or support. Staff supported people to access local services and to understand their options.

People were supported when they needed to be, such with attending local groups, visiting the vet for a pet or trying new activities. Staff encouraged people to celebrate any achievements no matter how small. A health and social care professional told us the service was very effective in engaging people who often did not want support initially. Staff worked closely with other professionals involved in people’s support. They made people aware if they were going to share information, and the reasons why the information needed to be shared. People were supported to attend health appointments when required. Some people had been encouraged to engage with health professionals such as GPs or dentists following long periods when they had been reluctant to attend appointments. Most people supported by the service did not have any support with preparing meals. Staff had begun preparing meals for one person who was reluctant to eat, in order to encourage them to stay healthy. Staff did not administer medicines to anyone they supported. However, they did speak to people about their medicines. Staff reminded people to take them and re-order them as required.

The service was run by a registered manager who provided support for people as part of their role. Staff told us the registered manager was very accessible. They told us the fact the registered manager still supported people meant they understood the challenges of their role and could offer advice and support. People were supported by staff who were recruited safely, although staff who had worked at the service for over 12 years did not have a reference on their file. Records showed references had been received but they had been archived. The provider agreed to try and locate the missing documents. People were supported by staff who had the right training and experience to meet their needs.

The provider and registered manager welcomed and sought feedback from people, staff and stakeholders on a regular basis through meetings and surveys. The service had a complaints policy in an accessible format which people had been given a copy of. No complaints had been received in the last 12 months. Regular audits of the quality of the service were completed. Any issues identified formed part of an action plan; this also recorded when any shortfalls were resolved and any learning.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.