Background to this inspection
Updated
20 April 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 took place on 10 and 24 January 2018 and was announced. On 10 January we visited the registered office, spoke with the registered manager and staff. We also visited two of the supported living settings to meet people and observe the interaction between people and staff. On 24 January, we visited the other two supported living settings to meet people and observe how staff engaged with people. We also spoke with more staff, and in the afternoon, held a focus group for the people who used the service to seek their views about the service they received. We gave the service one week’s notice of the inspection visit because the registered manager is often out of the office supporting the running of the service. We needed to be sure that they would be in. We also wanted the people who used the service to be made aware of our visit in advance. This was so they had enough time to think about whether or not they wished to meet with us, and if so, what they might wish to discuss with us.
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. The expert at this inspection had experience of caring for people who use this kind of service.
Prior to the inspection we looked at information we held about the service and used this information as part of our inspection planning. The information included notifications. Notifications are information on important events that happen in the service that the provider is required by law to notify us about. We also reviewed a Provider Information Return (PIR) completed by the provider. 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 used this information to assist with planning the inspection.
During the inspection, we met with nine people who used the service and spoke in depth with six of them at the focus group. Where people were unable or did not wish to speak with us about their experiences of the service, we observed the interaction between them and staff to help us understand. We also spoke with the registered manager, two team managers, a deputy manager and six support staff. We looked at the support plans and associated records for four people. We also looked at records for four staff and those relating to the provision of support and the management of the service.
Updated
20 April 2018
This announced comprehensive inspection took place on 10 and 24 January 2018. This was the first rated inspection of this service.
The service provides care and support to people living in four ‘supported living’ settings, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. Some people using the service lived in their own flats in one of two low rise blocks, others lived in ordinary houses within one street in Luton or within flats in a converted building that was previously a care home. Each setting had office space and facilities for staff to sleep in overnight.
Not everyone using this service received a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
The service 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.
The service had 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.
The service had safeguards in place to protect people from the risk of harm. People’s support plans and risk assessments were detailed, person-centred and reflective of their changing needs. Medicines were managed and administered safely and people were supported to manage their own medicines if they wished to and where this was assessed as safe. The provider had safe recruitment processes in place to ensure people were supported by suitable staff and there were enough staff with the right skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.
Staff received training which was relevant to their role and received regular supervision and support. Interactions between people and staff were positive and friendly and staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported. Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated regulations.
People had enough to eat and drink. People did their own meal planning, shopping and cooking with support from staff. They were supported by caring staff, who understood their needs, promoted their rights, encouraged their independence and respected their privacy and dignity.
People had opportunities to contribute to their care and support and were included in reviews and meetings. People had plans and aspirations for the future and were supported to work towards these. People also had active social lives and participated in many community activities.
The service had robust quality assurance systems in place and held regular audits to identify any areas that required improvement. There was a complaints policy which detailed how people could make a complaint if they wished.