You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 30 January 2020

About the service:

College View is a residential unit providing accommodation and care to young adults aged 19 to 25, who have a wide range of complex learning disabilities, such as autism and related autistic spectrum conditions

(ASC) and who have special needs resulting from behavioural, emotional and social difficulties (BESD). College View is based on the St. Johns School and College campus and is a 52 week a year service, meaning

that people can live at the service all year round. The service is registered to provide accommodation for up to 11 people and at the time of our inspection, there were six people living there.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning and physical disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

People’s experience of using this service:

Staff knew people extremely well and tailored their support accordingly. We observed strong relationships between staff and people due to the continuity of staffing and their approach. Systems supported people to stay safe and reduce the risks to them. Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and what action to take to keep people safe. There was enough staff to support people safely and the registered manager had safe recruitment procedures and processes in place.

Staff were trained in administering medicines. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection and we observed staff wearing gloves and aprons when supporting people.

People received high-quality person-centred care that exceeded their expectations. The management and staff team went above and beyond to ensure that people’s care and preferences met their expectations, with their wellbeing and independence being at the heart of the service. Activities were innovative and highly regarded by people and relatives. The service ensured people were involved in their community and empowered in the planning of activities to reduce social isolation and improve well-being. A relative told us, “They treat people with respect and make an effort to think of things which will enhance their life.”

People were supported to maintain their health and had support to access health care services when they needed to. 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 were fully involved in the service and had opportunities to give feedback. Feedback about the registered manager was very positive and staff felt very well supported. Staff were well motivated and very proud of the service, and morale was very high. Systems were in place to monitor the service and drive improvement.

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

Rating at last inspection: Requires Improvement (report published on 9 January 2019).

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehen

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 30 January 2020

The service was Safe.

Details are in our Safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 30 January 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our Effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 30 January 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our Caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 30 January 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 30 January 2020

The service was Well-led.

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.