Archived: Support Services for Disabled Children

The Support Service for Disabled Children provided personal care to young people up to the age of 18 with a learning disability, physical disability, Autistic Spectrum Disorder or complex health needs. The support was provided in the young people’s home to assist parents to get their child ready for school or college, as well as providing support to reduce pressures on families. The service enabled young people to access the community as part of their leisure time support.

The service had a registered 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.’

Families were complimentary about the service and made positive comments. They were happy with the care and support their child received from the service. One parent told us, “The staff are very skilled.” Another commented, “They are absolutely amazing.” One young person had written a card to thank staff it read, ‘Thank you for looking after me.’

All support staff along with the manager had been employed by Sunderland City Council (SCC) for a number of years and their recruitment had been carried out by the Council’s human resources department. The Council’s procedure included relevant checks being carried out before staff commenced employment.

We found the service employed enough support staff to meet young person’s needs. One staff member told us, “We get a regular diary each week of our calls, we know just what we are doing.”

Staff were appropriately trained to support the young people who used the service. The service had an electronic system of e-learning for a range of subjects, such as health and safety. Further subjects included face to face training for moving and assisting, first aid and the Council’s own safeguarding training. Mandatory training was up to date for all staff. Staff felt supported in progressing their skills and knowledge, and received regular supervision and appraisal to aid their development.

Staff had an understanding of safeguarding and whistleblowing. They knew how to report concerns about young people’s care, health and wellbeing. Staff felt the manager was responsive and felt concerns would be acted on. The provider had a process of recording of all safeguarding alerts on a central system which showed appropriate action had been taken using a multi-disciplinary approach. Support staff were made aware of any changes from the manager if they were not directly involved in safeguarding meetings.

The provider had systems in place to manage complaints, accidents and incidents. Records were kept on a central system along with actions which showed the service responded to situations and lessons had been learnt from such events to reduce risk. Relatives knew how to make a complaint and were confident that the service would respond.

Risk assessments and support plans had been developed and reviewed with parent’s involvement. These included how staff were to support young people safely, detailing their likes, dislikes and communication preferences. The service worked closely with other teams in the Council to develop strategies to manage behaviour that may challenge.

The service did not provide support in the administration of medicines to young people. Any medicines administration would be the responsibility of the parent. One young person did have emergency medicine to take with them when they were in the community but were fully able to administer these themselves when they need to. Records showed that this was agreed with the parents and social worker.

Parents felt the service was well managed and that they were involved in decisions relating to the support of their child. Staff felt the manager was supportive. One staff member told us, “I am well supported by the manager.”

The provider followed their data protection policy and stored records securely. Records were also stored electronically and protected with a user password.

The provider had a range of quality assurance processes in place. Parents and the young person’s views were sought in assessing the quality of the service. Support plans were audited by the manager to ensure the information within was relevant, valid and current. Other management records such as policies and procedures were reviewed by the Council’s policy department. The manager had plans in place to increase the knowledge and skills of staff to support the increasing number of young people on the Autistic Spectrum who were accessing the service.

Young people and relatives felt the service treated them with dignity. One young person told us, 'I have had the same staff for years and they are very respectful towards me.'

People felt they had enough information about the service. A relative commented, 'I feel well informed. They keep in touch with us and I can contact them anytime.'

People told us they were 'very happy' with the care service they received. One young person told us, 'I'm very happy with the staff. I know them well and they know me.' One parent told us, 'We're very satisfied with it and the service couldn't be better. They help her with her personal care exactly the same way I do.'

Staff were well trained and supported, so they knew how to assist people in the right way. The provider checked the quality of the service, and asked young people and their relatives for their views about the care service. Records were up to date and kept confidential.