ExtraCare Charitable Trust Hagley Road Village

ExtraCare Charitable Trust Hagley Road is an Extra Care housing service. The village has 260 apartments. 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 our inspection the service was supporting 50 people living in their own flats within the complex.

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

The provider had developed and sustained a positive culture. There was a strong ethos for quality care which ran throughout the service. Staff and the management team were committed to providing a high-quality service. They were proactive in identifying and implementing creative ways to ensure people were supported to live independent life styles.

There was a comprehensive holistic assessment of people's needs that looked at all areas of their life. A well-being advisor was available to support people with anything that could affect people's health and wellbeing. People had an enhanced sense of well-being and quality of life because staff actively encouraged and supported them.

People and their relatives spoke highly of the staff and management team. People received individualised care and support from staff. People had an enhanced sense of well-being and quality of life because staff actively encouraged and supported them.

People were supported to engage in individual and group-based community activities within the village that were meaningful to them. People were supported and encouraged to be independent and we saw the progress that people had made, resulted in improved health and wellbeing outcomes for people.

People said they felt safe living at the scheme with support from staff who arrived at the agreed time and stayed for the agreed length of time. Staff were aware of the actions to take in order to protect people from avoidable harm and potential abuse. People were supported to receive their medication safely and as prescribed. Staff were safely recruited, and staff turnover was low.

The provider recognised that the on-going development of staff skills, competence and knowledge was central to ensuring high-quality care. Staff spoke positively about their role and felt well supported to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively, so that people received care and support in-line with their needs and wishes

Staff were committed to delivering inclusive personalised care and strongly focused on supporting people's diverse needs and preferences. Staff spoke enthusiastically and passionately about how they provided people with high quality, person-centred care.

.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. People's right to privacy was respected by the staff who supported them and their dignity was maintained. People were supported to express their views and be

actively involved in making decisions about their care and support needs.

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.

The provider was very committed to ensuring they followed best practice. There was a 'Dementia and Mental Wellbeing Enabler' who supported people living with dementia-and other health related conditions. They supported people with individual strategies, self- help groups and advice, to promote people’s independence and to enable people to remain in their own homes.

The registered manager was very passionate about supporting people who lived in their own home. They used a variety of methods to check the quality of the service and develop good practice. The leadership and culture of the service was to provide a high-quality personalised support to people.

Rating at last inspection and update.

The last rating for this service was good. (published September 2018)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Staff were aware of the actions to take in order to protect people from avoidable harm and potential abuse. There were enough suitably trained staff on each shift to meet peoples’ care needs. People were supported to receive their medication safely and as prescribed.

The needs of people were met consistently by staff who had the right competencies, knowledge and, skills. Staff respected people’s views and respected their decisions. People were supported in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People received suitable support to eat and drink the things they liked and needed to stay well. People were supported to make use of the services of a variety of mental and physical health professionals. When necessary the care manager would signpost people to the provider’s other services within the housing complex which supported people’s wellbeing.

People were supported by regular staff who knew and understood their history, preferences and needs. Staff spoke fondly about the people who used the service and how they enjoyed supporting them to engage in things they liked. Care provided respected people’s privacy and promoted their independence.

Staff had a passion to meet people’s individual needs and wishes. This had resulted in improving the conditions of many people who used the service.

Staff focused on providing person centred care. Staff were flexible with their call times depending upon people’s needs and wishes. People were supported to take part in activities they enjoyed and staff respected their choices. People could be assured that appropriate action would be taken if they raised concerns or complained.

Senior staff lead by example and were available to staff for guidance and support. Staff were motivated and shared a common vision and set of values. The provider monitored the quality of the service and had taken action when necessary to improve the care people received.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

People who used the service were involved in planning their care. They were supported to make choices about the care they received. One person told us, 'They always ask what I want every day'.

Care was planned and designed to meet the individual health and welfare needs of the people who used the service. A person we spoke to expressed confidence that their care was planned, managed and delivered with dignity in the way that was promised.

We saw that the provider had made suitable arrangements to ensure that people who used the service were safeguarded against the risk of abuse.

The provider had robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure that people employed at the service were of good character and had the necessary skills, qualifications and knowledge to meet the needs of the people who used the service. A member of staff told us, 'I feel I can raise anything if I'm worried'.

The provider was able to protect people from unsafe care and treatment by regularly assessing and monitoring the quality of the service provided.