We carried out a review of the data available to us about University Care 2 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 University Care 2, you can give feedback on this service.
University Care 2 is a care home that provides personal care for up to four people and supports people living with learning disabilities, complex needs, including people living with mental health needs. The accommodation consists of a detached house in Beeston in Nottingham. At the time of our inspection four people were living at the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways; promotion of choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
People were positive about living at the service, they felt staff understood their needs and treated them very well, supporting them to remain safe. The provider had safeguarding policies and procedures and had provided staff with safeguarding training. Risks associated with people’s physical and mental health needs had been assessed. People and their relatives where appropriate, had been involved in discussions and decisions in how staff supported people with known risks. Risks were continually monitored and risk assessments, and guidance for staff were updated when required. Staff had a positive approach to risk taking and worked with people to achieve good outcomes. People lived in an environment that was maintained well and to a high standard. Health and safety checks were completed on a regular basis. Systems and procceses were in place to report and review incidents and complaints.
People’s prescribed medicines were managed and administrated following national best practice guidance. Staff had the required guidance to safely and effectively support people with their medicines. This included training and their competency assessed. People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff, an on-call manager rota ensured additional staff could be called upon at any time. Staff skill mix such as experience was considered by the management team when developing the staff rota. Robust staff recruitment procedures were used to ensure only suitable staff were employed.
People were supported by staff effectively because they had received training the provider had identified as required. Staff were also supported by a management team who were experienced and knowledgeable.
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. Personal autonomy was encouraged and supported.
People were supported with dietary needs and were involved in menu planning. People’s health was monitored and people had access to health services. Independence was promoted and people’s life style choices were supported. Social inclusion was achieved, people were active citizens in their community and participated in recreational and leisure activities and interests. People accessed the local community independently and had no restrictions placed upon them of when they returned. Where people required staff support to access the community this was provided when people requested it.
People received opportunities to share their experience about the service via house meetings and informally by talking with staff. Plans were in place to send an annual survey to people, relatives, staff and external professionals as part of the provider’s quality assurance process.
The provider regularly visited the service and a range of audits and checks were completed to ensure quality and safety. The provider had an improvement plan and staff felt valued and involved in the development of the service.
Rating at last inspection:
This was the provider’s first inspection since registration.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on when the service was registered.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.