You are here

The Camden Society London Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 19 December 2019

About the service

The Camden Society London offers support to people with a learning disability at their own home, specialist accommodation or in the community. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of the inspection the service was providing personal care to nine people; five in their own homes (known as floating support) and three in a supported living scheme.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Before December 2018 the service was known as 60 Holmes Rd. Since December 2018 the service had been undergoing major changes. These included the provider organisation becoming a part of the Thera group in December 2018 and change in the contract for the floating support part of the service in July 2019. This was a first inspection under the new registration and as a part of Thera brand.

The changes had impacted the service and led to identification of some shortfalls in aspects of the service provision. However, feedback from people using the service, relatives and the local authority showed that the service had been proactive in making improvements. Gaps in the service delivery were being addressed and overall improvement had been observed by all stakeholders.

Staff received training and support to support people effectively. Not all staff received refresher training in positive behavioural support techniques, to support people with behaviour that may challenge. We have made a recommendation in respect of this.

Staff at times arrived late at the care visits, however, people, relatives and feedback from the local authority showed staff punctuality was improving.

There were enough staff deployed to support people and people were usually visited by the same staff who they knew. This ensured the continuity of care and helped develop positive relationships between the staff and people.

People received safe care from staff. Appropriate recruitment practices helped to ensure that only suitable staff supported people. There were systems and procedures to protect people from abuse. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing had been assessed and regularly reviewed. Accidents and incidents had been monitored and action was taken to stop them from reoccurring. Medicines were managed safely and staff competencies in medicines administration had been assessed.

People were supported to live a healthy life. They received sufficient and nutritious food and drink that met their personal preferences. Staff had worked with external professionals to ensure people stayed healthy. People’s physical health had been monitored and supportive action was taken by staff when people’s health needs changed.

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.

Staff were kind and caring. Their approach to supporting people considered people’s individual needs and wishes. Staff received training in equality and diversity and had attended a good practice workshop. The aim was to help staff to provide support with respect to people’s individual characteristics and with consideration of professional boundaries.

Staff used a variety of methods to communicate with people to ensure people understood and could respond to them. Staff supported people to develop new skills and participate in a range of activities they enjoyed doing. People were encouraged to express their views about the support and the service they received. This was done through regular conversations with their lead workers and through periodic quality surveys.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity when providing personal care to them.

Each person had a range of pers

Inspection areas



Updated 19 December 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 19 December 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 19 December 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 19 December 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 19 December 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.