Support Horizons

Updated 17 February 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 was planned to check 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 site visit took place on 16 and 18 January 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that the manager would be available to assist us with the inspection. We visited the office location on the above dates to see the manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures. We also visited two of the supported living locations where people lived who received 24 hour support from the service. We spoke briefly with three people there, observed interactions between people and staff and examined on-site records.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. They carried out a series of phone calls to three people supported by the service and a relative to seek their views about their care. We also spoke with six care workers.

Due to administrative changes within CQC a Pre-inspection Information Questionnaire (PIQ) was not sent to the provider for completion ahead of the inspection. The provider supplied all of the information we requested of them during and immediately following the inspection and completed the PIR as well as possible without prior notice. Prior to the inspection we sent surveys to six people receiving support, six relatives and 68 staff. Surveys were completed and returned by 2 people receiving support, 2 relatives and 25 staff. The feedback received is incorporated in the report.

Prior to the inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service. This included any notifications that we received. Notifications are reports of events the provider is required by law to inform us about. We contacted three representatives of the local authorities who funded people supported by the service, for their feedback. No concerns were raised about the service.

During the inspection we spoke with the chief executive officer, the registered manager and other members of the senior management team. We examined a sample of three care plans and other documents relating to people’s care. We looked at a sample of other records to do with the operation of the service, including five recent recruitment records, training and supervision records and medicines recording.

Updated 17 February 2018

Support Horizons provides care to people living in a variety of ‘supported living’ settings. Not everyone using the service receives regulated activity. The Care Quality Commission only inspects the service being received by people provided with personal care, help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. The service supported nineteen people, within the scope of our registration at the time of this inspection. The service also provides support to other people which does not fall within the remit of the Care quality Commission, where support does not include personal care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) does not regulate premises used for supported living, this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. The service is a ‘Community Interest Company’. This means it is operated for the benefit of the people supported and any surplus capital is reinvested to benefit them. People and their representatives make up half of the board of directors.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good in all domains. At this inspection we found the service remained Good in all domains and was rated Good overall.

People felt safe and well supported by the service. They said staff treated them with respect, looked after their rights and protected their dignity. People felt involved in their care planning. They said staff sought their consent and enabled them to make day to day decisions about their care and activities. People got on well with the care staff but some had experienced issues with office staff. They felt staff were competent and looked after their health and dietary needs. People said they could complain if they were unhappy about something and issues had been addressed. People’s vies about the service had been sought and improvements had been made.

Identified risks were assessed and mitigated without restricting people’s freedom. Individual care needs were assessed and identified and detailed care plans enabled person-centred care. People‘s health and nutritional needs were supported and their medicines were managed safely on their behalf, where necessary.

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 treated with kindness and patience by staff who knew them well and understood their diverse needs and communication. A range of appropriate communication aids were used where needed to help people to express their wishes and choices. People were supported to have access to appropriate activities and the community and their spiritual needs were met.

Staff received a thorough induction, core training and attended periodic training refreshers to maintain their knowledge and practice. They were supported through individual supervision and appraisal. Staff understood the values and aims of the service and felt these were conveyed to them consistently and effectively.

The management team exercised effective oversight of the service. A computerised management system allowed monitoring and analysis of key aspects of the service and regular meetings and reporting ensured relevant information was shared.

Further information is in the detailed findings below