We carried out a review of the data available to us about Foxglove Supported Living Limited on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Foxglove Supported Living Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Foxglove Supported Living Limited provides supported living to people in Hull who may be living with a physical disability, learning disability and/or autism. At the time of the inspection, the service was providing support to 10 people who live in seven houses and one flat within the community. The service was run from an office based in the local area.
The service demonstrated 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 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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were kept safe from avoidable harm and abuse. Staff had the relevant skills and knowledge to assess and manage risks to people’s safety and wellbeing. People’s medicines were managed safely. However, the provider’s monitoring systems had not identified some shortfalls in medicine and decision-making records. The manager addressed shortfalls and advised records and monitoring systems would be reviewed and updated following the inspection. The provider had reviewed their quality assurance systems, though the new system needed to be implemented.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Though where people had capacity to make decisions, they were not always recorded in the right way.
People were respected as individuals and care was tailored to people’s needs. People chose the staff who supported them and when and received person-centred care. People’s healthcare needs were met. Staff worked closely with relevant professionals, followed professional advice and supported people to follow a healthy, balanced diet.
People accessed a wide variety of meaningful activities and were supported to maintain their relationships with family and friends. People’s independence was promoted as staff encouraged choice, control and inclusion in the local community in line with the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This enabled people who use the service to develop their skills and independence, achieve positive outcomes and live as full a life as possible.
People and their relatives were happy with the care and support provided and were encouraged to contribute to the development of the service. There was a positive culture and staff promoted people’s rights. People accessed a wide variety of meaningful activities and were supported to maintain their relationships with family and friends.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the Care Quality Commission (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 13 July 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service currently provides supported living to nine people with a learning disability, autism and /or physical disability who live in six houses and one flat within the community. The service is run from an office based in Sutton, Kingston upon Hull.
There was a registered manager at this service. 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.
Recruitment procedures were robust and there were sufficient staff providing support according to assessed needs to support people. Staff knew how to safeguard people from the risk of abuse and harm; they had received training and had procedures to guide them. There were procedures in place to manage risk which helped to ensure people were safe whilst not being too restrictive.
People’s health and nutritional needs were met. People were supported to attend appointments and access community health care professionals for advice and treatment when required. Medicines were managed safely and staff ensured people received their medicines where necessary. Menus were planned by people who also did their own shopping on occasions.
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. Staff approach was observed as kind, caring and friendly whilst remaining professional. Staff treated people with dignity and respect. There were positive comments made by people who used the service and visiting health and social care professionals about the support provided at this service.
Staff supported people to be involved in their care and to make choices about how they spent their time. Wherever possible, staff encouraged people’s independence and supported them to access the local community.
We saw from records that staff had received training, supervision and appraisal for their development. Staff told us the registered manager was supportive of them. They felt listened to, able to make suggestions and were confident in supporting people who used the service.
There was a quality monitoring system in place which consisted of audits, checks, the management of complaints and obtaining people’s views about the service. The checks were not always recorded but the operations manager assured us they would ensure these would be recorded in future.