Archived: Oxford Supported Living Scheme

People’s experience of using this service:

People were encouraged and supported to take positive risks so the restrictions on their lives were reduced to a minimum.

People and their relatives told us staff were kind, compassionate and respectful towards them. The management team and staff had developed strong relationships with people and their family members. Staff were described as 'going that one step further' to improve the quality of people’s lives.

We received extremely positive feedback on how staff went over and beyond what they were expected to in order to provide a truly person-centred service. The provider found innovative ways to protect people who received care in their homes from the risk of social isolation. The service aimed to enrich people's lives by supporting people to connect with others, the community, and engage them in activities away from their homes. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support

People consistently told us how they received care from staff who knew their needs well, at times when they expected them and this helped to make them feel safe.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. They were provided with care in the least restrictive way possible, and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were able to live in their own accommodation and maintain personal or family relationships.

Staff were highly skilled, motivated and knowledgeable. They provided flexible care and support in line with a person's needs and wishes.

The service was well-led. There was a visible and effective leadership team who were open and transparent. This resulted in an effectively organised, supportive and well managed service. The service had a strong sense of social responsibility and played an active role in the community.

The registered manager demonstrated how their robust quality assurance systems had sustained continual development and improvement at the service. Since the last inspection, they had made many positive changes and were driven to provide an outstanding service.

Rating at last inspection: Good. The last report was published on 24 September 2016.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

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.

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

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

People told us they felt safe. Staff were trained in safeguarding and understood what action they should take if they had any concerns that people were at risk of harm. The registered manager checked staff's suitability to deliver personal care in people's own homes during the recruitment process. This included employment references and disclosure and barring checks (DBS). DBS checks enable employers to make safer recruitment decisions and prevent unsuitable people from working with vulnerable people. The number of staff was sufficient to meet people’s needs.

Care plans included risk assessments of people's individual health needs and wellbeing and described the actions staff needed to take to manage the identified risks. Staff knew how to meet the needs of people as they had familiarized themselves with the care plans and shadowed experienced staff when they had commenced their employment.

The registered manager had assessed risks which may occur in each person's home and advised staff on the actions they should take to minimise these risks. Medicines were administered and recorded in line with provider’s policy and guidelines.

The manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Records showed that people, their families and relevant health professionals were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff understood they could only care for and support people who consented to being cared for.

Staff received an induction and on-going training which enabled them to carry out their roles effectively. The training included safeguarding, dementia awareness, infection control and moving and handling. Opportunities were available for staff to take further training such as diplomas in health and social care and leadership training. Staff felt supported and received regular supervision which included unannounced spot checks while supporting people in their own homes.

People were supported to meet their nutritional needs by staff who understood their needs and any associated risks. Staff assisted people to obtain advice and support from other health professionals, which enabled people to maintain and improve their health. It also enabled people to have their care promptly adjusted to their needs when these changed.

People told us staff respected their privacy, dignity and independence, and they were supported to live the lives they wanted. Staff members knew well each person they supported. Staff had a good understanding of people's interests, likes and dislikes. This meant that staff could have conversations with people about things that were important and of interest to them.

The provider was responsive to people's needs and staff listened to people’s opinions and suggestions. Systems were in place to help ensure any concerns or complaints were responded to appropriately.

People were supported by staff who understood and were responsive to people's individual and changing care needs. Care plans provided clear information about the level of support a person had agreed and reviews were held on a regular basis. The person and when needed their family members were involved in the reviews.

The registered manager created a positive culture within the service and both staff and people felt the management team were friendly and approachable. There was an effective internal quality monitoring procedure in place. Checks or audits were completed in respect of medicines management, care plans, health and safety, and equality and diversity. These checks ensured people were cared for and supported in an appropriate way.