We carried out a review of the data available to us about Allerton C&S SE on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Allerton C&S SE, you can give feedback on this service.
Allerton C&S SE provides care and support to 50 people. 43 people were supported in 12 ‘supported living’ services. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. Not everyone using Allerton C&E SE receives the regulated activity, personal care; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. At time of inspection ten people were receiving the regulated activity, personal care. Allerton C&S SE also supports seven people in their own home. At the time of inspection, two people receiving a domiciliary care package were receiving the regulated activity, personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and their relatives told us that they felt safe and well supported in their homes. One relative told us, “I know all the staff in [relatives] home. They are wonderful people.”
Staff were observed as being patient with people and treating them with dignity and respect. In conversations with people staff did not speak for them. They supported people to make their views known.
People were engaged in the running and operation of their home and service and the environment looked personal and homely.
People had detailed care plans that were personal to them. Peoples likes and dislikes were highlighted with a personal life history. Risks were identified with detailed action for staff to keep them safe. Staff demonstrated knowledge of how to keep people safe and recognised the different signs of abuse.
Staff protected people's privacy and dignity and encouraged people to maintain their independence by enabling them to do as much as possible for themselves.
Staff training was up to date and relevant to the needs of people they supported.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people. Right support means the model of care and setting maximises people’s choice, control and independence, right care means that care is person-centred and promotes people’s dignity, privacy and human rights and right culture means that the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff ensure people using services lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives.
The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture. The service was empowering people to maximise independence. People's houses were treated as their home with staff not having keys and had to be given access by people who lived there. Staff were minimising prescriptive care and support. People were at the centre of all decisions and involved in their care and support.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was good (published 17 January 2018). At this inspection the rating for this service remained good.
Why we inspected
We received concerns in relation to the management of medicines. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other key questions. We therefore did not inspect them. Ratings from previous comprehensive inspections for those key questions were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection.
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 Allerton C&S SE on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Why the service was rated Good.
People were protected from abuse. Risks to people were assessed and minimised. There were sufficient numbers of staff in place to keep people safe and meet their needs. People received their medicines safely. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection where possible. Accidents and incidents were managed effectively.
People’s needs and choices had been assessed when they started using the service. Staff were trained and their skills and competence checked by the registered manager. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff were seen to be kind and compassionate towards people. People and their relatives were involved with making decisions about care and support. People were treated with privacy and dignity.
People received care that was personalised to their needs. People were supported to take part in meaningful activities and to engage with the local community. People were encouraged to raise concerns or complaints.
There was an inclusive, open and transparent nature to the service. The registered manager understood the legal requirements of their role. The service had an effective system of checks in place which were used to assess the quality of care provided by staff. The service worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure care was provided in a joined up way.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Elysium Supported Living Limited is registered to provide personal care and supported living to younger adults who have a learning or physical disability, autistic spectrum disorder, mental health needs, or other conditions such as sensory impairment. The ethos of the service is to enable people to gain and maintain skills to achieve independent living. People are supported in the community, in their family home, or in shared houses. The Care Quality Commission inspects the care and support the service provides to people but does not inspect the accommodation they live in.
There was a manager in post. 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 were trained in how to protect people from abuse and harm. They were aware of the procedures to follow in case of abuse or suspicion of abuse, whistle blowing and bullying.
Risk assessments were centred on the needs of the individual. They included clear measures to reduce identified risks and guidance for staff to follow to make sure people were protected from harm. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to identify how risks of re-occurrence could be reduced.
There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. Staffing levels were calculated according to people’s changing needs and ensured continuity of one to one support. Thorough recruitment practice was followed to ensure staff were suitable for their role.
Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines. Records relevant to the administration of medicines or the supervision of medicines were monitored. This ensured they were accurately kept and medicines were administered to people and taken by people safely according to their individual needs.
Staff knew each person well and understood how to meet their support needs. Each person’s needs and personal preferences had been assessed before care was provided and were continually reviewed. This ensured that the staff could provide care in a way that met people’s particular needs and wishes.
Staff had completed the training they needed to support people in a safe way. They had the opportunity to receive further training specific to the needs of the people they supported. All members of care staff received regular one to one supervision sessions to ensure they were supported while they carried out their role. They received an annual appraisal of their performance and training needs.
All care staff and management were trained in the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and were knowledgeable about the requirements of the legislation. People’s mental capacity was assessed and meetings were held in their best interest when appropriate.
Staff sought and obtained people’s consent before they provided support. When people declined or changed their mind, their wishes were respected.
Staff supported people when they planned their individual menus and ensured people made informed choices that promoted their health. Staff knew about people’s dietary preferences and restrictions.
The staff used creative ways to make sure that people had inclusive methods of communication. People told us that staff communicated effectively with them, responded to their needs promptly and treated them with kindness and respect. People were satisfied with how their support was delivered. Clear information about the service, the management, the facilities, and how to complain was provided to people. Information was available in a format that met people’s needs.
People were referred to health care professionals when needed and in a timely way. Personal records included people’s individual plans of support, likes and dislikes and preferred activities.
The registered manager and the staff’s approach promoted an environment where people could affirm themselves and excel. They promoted people’s independence, encouraged them to do as much as possible for themselves and to make their own decisions. Comments from relatives included, “The support workers motivate my son to try out new things and keep on learning”.
People’s privacy was respected and people were assisted in a way that respected their dignity and individuality. Staff took account of people’s psychological wellbeing.
People’s individual assessments and support plans were reviewed regularly with their participation or their representatives’ involvement. A relative told us, “We are definitely involved.” People’s support plans were updated when their needs changed to make sure they received the support they needed.
The provider took account of people’s complaints, comments and suggestions. People’s views were sought and acted upon. The provider sent questionnaires regularly to people, their legal representatives and staff. The results were analysed and action was taken in response to people’s views.
Staff told us they felt valued and supported under the manager’s leadership. There was honesty and transparency from management when mistakes occurred. The manager notified the Care Quality Commission of any significant events that affected people or the service. Comprehensive quality assurance audits were carried out to identify how the service could improve and action was taken to implement improvements.
People had detailed care and support plans, which they were involved in developing, so that staff knew how to meet their needs.
There were processes in place to protect people from abuse, and the people we spoke with said they felt safe and able to express their concerns. The necessary recruitment checks had been carried out on staff before they started working in the service.
Staff received training, supervision and appraisal to support them to meet the needs of people using the service.
The service checked and monitored the quality of care provided, and asked staff, people using the service and their relatives for their views.