Creative Support - Ulverston Autism Service

Updated 11 September 2018

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 31 July 2018. We gave the provider 24 hours’ notice of our visit to the service because the location was a care home for adults with complex needs who have structured routines and often go out during the day and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors.

There were six people living in the home when we carried out our inspection. Most of the people who lived in the home could not easily share their views with us.

During the inspection we spoke with one person who lived in the home, two support staff, a health care professional, the registered and deputy manager of the home and the provider's service director. We observed how staff interacted with people and looked at the care records for three people. We also looked at records that related to how the home was managed.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This 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 reviewed the information we held about the service, including the information in the PIR, before we visited the home. We also used a planning tool to collate all this evidence and information prior to visiting the home.

Updated 11 September 2018

This inspection took place on 31 July 2018 and was announced because the location is a care home for adults with complex needs who have structured routines and often go out during the day and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

Creative Support - Ulverston Autism Service is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The home provides accommodation and personal care for six adults who have autism and complex needs. Each person has an individual living space within the home which is recognised as their own flat. The service also has communal facilities that people share including a lounge area, a dining room, kitchen and laundry room. Each flat has access to its own secure garden area and there is also a communal garden.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people’s needs. Staff training was ongoing and staff had received sufficient training to safely support and care for people. Staff were supported by the registered manager and deputy manager through regular staff meetings, supervision and appraisals.

We saw that the service worked with a variety of external agencies and health professionals to provide appropriate care and support to meet people’s physical and emotional health needs.

Where safeguarding concerns or incidents had occurred these had been reported by the registered manager to the appropriate authorities and we could see records of the actions that had been taken by the service to protect people.

When employing fit and proper persons the recruitment process had included all of the required checks of suitability.

People’s rights were protected. The registered manager was knowledgeable about their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were only deprived of their liberty if this had been authorised by the appropriate body or where applications had been made to do so.

Hazards to people’s safety had been identified and managed. People were supported to access activities that were made available to them and pastimes of their choice.

People were treated with respect and their dignity and privacy were actively promoted by the staff supporting them.

Auditing and quality monitoring systems were in place that allowed the service to demonstrate effectively the safety and quality of the provision.

The focus of the service was on promoting people’s rights. 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.

Further information is in the detailed findings below