White Doves

Updated 31 October 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 21 and 25 September 2017and was unannounced on the first day and announced on the second. One inspector conducted the inspection. The office of White Doves was situated in a supported living service that supported five people. We were able to talk with four people who used this service and observe interactions between staff and people during our visit.

Before our visit we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We found the information in the PIR was an accurate assessment of how the service operated, such as, what they did well and areas they identified for improvements.

We reviewed the information we held about the service. We looked at information received from relatives, from the local authority commissioners and the statutory notifications the registered manager had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services which are paid for by the local authority. They told us they had received no information of concern about the service.

We spoke with six people and three relatives. We spoke with the provider, the registered manager, the deputy manager, a care coordinator, a team leader and six support workers. We also spoke with one healthcare professional who provided specialist support.

We reviewed four people’s care plans to see how their support was planned and delivered. We reviewed management records of the checks the provider made to assure people received a quality service.

Updated 31 October 2017

This inspection took place on 21 and 25 September 2017. The inspection was unannounced on the first day and announced on the second. We last inspected this service on 15 September 2015 and gave the home a rating of ‘Good’ in all areas and ‘Good’ overall. At this inspection we found the service remained ’Good’.

White Doves is registered to provide personal care to people within a supported living service. There were 31 people using the service at the time of our inspection. This included people with a learning disability and mental health needs. People required varying levels of support from the provider, with some having short care visits and other people had the support of one or more members of staff throughout the day and night.

A requirement of the provider’s registration is that they have a registered manager. 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. At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager at the service.

The provider had taken over a new contract with the local authority in March 2017. This had led to an increase in the numbers of people they provided personal care to and the transfer of some staff from the previous provider. Most people and staff we spoke to felt this transition had been well managed by the provider and they were kept informed of changes and important updates.

People and their relatives told us they continued to feel safe, and staff treated them well. The management team and staff understood how to protect people they supported from abuse, and knew what procedures to follow to report any concerns.

There were enough staff to support people safely within their homes and to provide them with support whilst accessing the local community. Recruitment procedures made sure staff were of a suitable character to care for people.

Medicines were stored and administered safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed. However we found some recording errors which the provider addressed immediately. People were supported to attend health care appointments when they needed to and received healthcare that supported them to maintain their wellbeing.

People and their relatives thought staff were kind and responsive to people’s needs, and people’s privacy and dignity was respected. Staff supported people to maintain their independence as much as possible.

Management and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and DoLS, and supported people in line with these principles. People were able to make everyday decisions themselves which helped them to maintain their independence.

People continued to be supported to go on holiday and to access the local community when they wished. Activities, interests and hobbies were arranged according to people’s individual preferences, needs and abilities. People were encouraged to maintain links with friends and family.

People, their relatives and most staff, felt the management team were kind, supportive and promoted an open culture. Positive communication was encouraged and any identified concerns were acted upon by the management team and provider. People, relatives and staff were kept updated and informed about the recent change in provider with regular meetings.

Staff were supported by the management team through team meetings and supervision sessions. Staff felt valued and listened to by the management team and felt their training and induction supported them to meet the needs of people they supported.

People and relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint if they needed to and were confident concerns identified would be dealt with in a timely manner. The provider monitored complaints to identify any trends and patterns and made changes to the service in response to concerns or complaints.

People and relatives were encouraged to provide feedback about the support they received. The provider acted on the feedback to improve the quality of support the service provided. The provider carried out regular quality checks to ensure the service maintained a high level of support to people.