West Midlands Supported Living Service

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

This inspection took place 20 June 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure someone was available.

West Midlands Supported Living has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

People continued to be kept safe with the care they received from the staff who supported them. Staff demonstrated good knowledge in how they were to protect people from harm, they recognised the signs of abuse and knew how to report this. The registered manager had identified potential risks to people and had put plans in place to support staff. This was to reduce the risk to people without taking away people’s right to make decisions about their care. There were enough staff to support people’s care needs. People were supported with their medicines in a safe way. Staff understood the importance of reducing the risk of infection to keep people safe.

People’s care continued to be assessed and reviewed with external healthcare professionals involved from the start. People were supported to have a healthy balanced diet. Where people required additional support with their eating and drinking staff knew who required this support. 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 support this practice. Staff worked with external healthcare professionals and followed their guidance and advice about how to support people.

People were treated well which had a positive impact on their well-being. People and relatives felt the staff team were kind and friendly and treated them with respect. Staff helped people to make choices about their care and the views and decisions they had made about their care were listened and acted upon.

People received personalised care which met their needs in a timely way. People were supported to continue with their hobbies and interests which promoted their independence and confidence. People had access to information about how they could complain about the service. Where the registered manager had received complaints, these had been responded to, and was working towards a solution to resolve this.

The provider met people in their homes to understand if they were happy with the support they received. Relatives had the opportunity to raise their suggestions and ideas about how the service was run. Staff said they felt all worked well as a team and supported by the provider to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively, through training and daily contact with the registered manager. Staff felt involved in the service and said they felt able to share their ideas about the way in which the service was run. We found checks the registered manager and the provider completed on the service focused upon the experiences of people.

The service is registered to provide personal care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the service was providing care and support to four people who were living in shared accommodation across two locations. The levels of support people received from the service varied, according to their assessed needs and levels of independence.

Prior to the inspection the provider had notified us that the registered manager had left the service and that a new manager had been appointed and was in the process of registering with CQC. 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 were supported by staff who had received training in how to recognise possible signs of abuse and how to report any concerns. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in this area and what actions they should take.

Staff were recruited appropriately and there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. Staff had received appropriate induction training and on-going training was in place in order to develop staff and ensure they had the skills to meet the needs of the people they supported.

People’s consent was appropriately obtained by staff when caring for them. Care plans were in place which detailed the care people wished to receive. People were involved in developing how they wanted to be supported and were encouraged to be as independent as possible. They were supported to access healthcare appointments and to maintain a healthy diet which reflected their choices and preferences.

People told us that the liked the staff who supported them and staff spoke warmly of the people they cared for. Staff enjoyed their role and felt supported by managers to provide a good service.

Complaints information was available in alternative formats. Relatives and staff were confident of the actions they would take if they had concerns and that that any concerns would be dealt with appropriately.

People, relatives and staff knew the assistant director and felt they were available when they needed to contact them. Care staff felt the management team involved them and they were able to raise any areas of concern or new ideas with them. The management team ensured regular checks were completed to monitor the quality of the care that people received and had identified areas they felt would improve the service for people.

Relatives were complimentary about the care and support that people received. Relatives told us they were: 'Very happy with the care X (person's name) is receiving'. 'X (person) is as happy as Larry'.

We found that proper steps had been taken to ensure that individualised care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Staff received the training and support needed to ensure people received appropriate care.

The provider had systems of audit in place to enable them to monitor the quality of the service provided and ensure that people received appropriate care and treatment.

We found that any comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.

We found that the provider supported people to be involved and to make decisions about the delivery of their own care. Care staff knew people's preferences and supported those choices. We found the the provider supported people's independence and were respectful of people who used the service.

Care staff knew people's care needs as well as any triggers which might suggest an immediate support need in that moment. Care plan records were person centred, current and provided care staff with clear guidance on how to support people appropriately and to meet their needs effectively.

People were protected from abuse or the risks of abuse as staff were supported to make sure that any concerns were addressed appropriately. We also found that appropriate checks had been made by the provider at the recruitment stage to make sure people who they employed were appropriate to work with the people they provided care to.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of care it provided, in order to make improvements where necessary.