St Anne's Community Services - Ripon Community House

About the service

St Anne’s Community Services Ripon provides support to people living in their own supported living accommodation. The service supports 5 people with learning disabilities and/or autism with personal care and support in their own home. At the time of the inspection, the service was supporting four people living in one group house. There was a sleeping-in room for staff.

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

Right Support

The service supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence over their own lives. People were supported to pursue their aspiration and interests, such as moving on and planning achievable goals for the future.

The service supported people in their own home. People were supported to keep their home safe, clean and to meet their sensory and physical needs. The communal areas were modern with mutually agreed decor. People had personalised their bedrooms to reflect their preferences. There was a staff sleep in room and this was agreed with peoples consent and staff respected the people’s home.

People received the medicines they needed to support their health needs. The registered manager closely monitored the use of any ‘when required’ (known as PRN) medicines. These were managed in an individualised way.

Right Care

The service had enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. The service tried to match staff with people’s preferences to enhance their experiences. Staff knew people’s individual communication styles well. They knew how to interpret their signs, gestures, behaviours and body language. They ensured people had access to information in formats best suited to their sensory needs.

Staff knew people well and responded to them appropriately and sensitively. People’s care, treatment and support plans reflected their range of needs and promoted their wellbeing. People took part in activities. However, we found some outings were not always based on people’s preferences.

Right Culture

The service had a positive culture that focused on person-centred care and meaningful outcomes for people were planned. People were encouraged to be active citizens in their local community.

Feedback from people and their relatives reflected that staff understood the values of the service. Staff knew how to keep people safe and well and give them the best support they could in the least restrictive way. Staff knew and understood people well. They got to know people as unique individuals and personalities regarding this as a key element of person-centred care.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service under the previous provider was Good (published 2 February 2018).

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected

We undertook this inspection to assess that the service is applying the principles of Right support right care right culture.

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.

The support provided may include assistance with personal care, support with meals or accessing the community. The service provides support to both younger and older adults (aged 65 and above). At the time of our inspection, the service supported nine people who may be living with a learning disability or have autistic spectrum disorder.

We inspected the service on 22 November and 6 December 2017. This was an announced inspection and we gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of the visit, because it was a small service and we needed to be sure people would be in.

Following our last inspection, the service was awarded a rating of Good. At this inspection, we found the service remained Good.

There were two managers in post who had registered with CQC. They assisted throughout the inspection.

The people supported by the service said they felt safe. The provider had safeguarding policies and procedures in place. Staff understood their responsibility to report any concerns and how they would do this. We found suitable levels of staff were in place to meet people’s needs and people received support from a consistent staff team. Staff continued to be recruited in a safe manner and had an induction process to ensure their competence.

We saw the service tried to promote people’s safety and considered how risks could be addressed. Medication was stored and administered safely. We spoke with the registered managers about the recording of prescribed creams.

The registered managers provided on-going support to staff in the form of supervisions, appraisals and team meetings. Staff received training in key areas and the registered manager completed regular observations of people’s practice to assess their skills and competence.

Where needed, people were supported to maintain a balanced diet. We received positive feedback about the staff from people supported by the service and their relatives. We observed staff had a rapport with people and understood their needs and abilities. Staff respected people’s privacy and care was provided in a kind and compassionate manner.

We reviewed care records relating to people supported by the service. Records were person-centred and made reference to people’s preferences, their abilities and the support they required. The support being provided was reviewed to ensure it continued to meet people’s needs and supported their aspirations.

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.

People gave us positive feedback about the registered managers. The registered managers and provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. People were given the opportunity to feedback about the quality of care they received. We saw the registered managers responded in a timely manner to concerns raised.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.