East Cambridgeshire Learning Disability Partnership

Updated 9 January 2023

Cambridgeshire Learning Disability Partnership has been registered with the Care Quality Commission since November 2016, provides regulated activities for treatment of disease, disorder or injury and had never been inspected. The Cambridgeshire Learning Disability Partnership (LDP) brings together specialist health and social care services for people with a learning disability.

The LDP is responsible for commissioning and providing these services on behalf of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Integrated Care Board, and Cambridgeshire County Council. Social Care staff are employed by the County Council, and health staff are employed by Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Foundation Trust. There is a Formal Management Agreement between both organisations for the Integrated service and all staff are part of the LDP’.

The LDP directly provides access to specialist nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, allied health professionals, Social Workers and Social Care staff through its integrated community teams, which cover the county from four locations:

• Huntingdon
• East Cambridgeshire
• Fenland
• South Cambridgeshire and city

This report relates to our inspection of East Cambridgeshire Learning Disability Partnership. Reports for the other three learning disability partnerships services are available on our website. The LDP in house provider services directly provide daytime support, respite care and some supported living accommodation in various locations across Cambridgeshire. The in house services referred to are registered with the CQC individually and separately from the community teams referred to in this inspection The majority of daytime support, respite care, domiciliary care and supported living accommodation were commissioned by the LDP from a wide range of independent and voluntary sector care providers, acting in partnership with the LDP to deliver high-quality care options for people with a learning disability. Their aim is to enable people to live as independently as possible in their local communities, accessing mainstream services wherever possible.

What people who use the service say

We spoke with three carers over the phone and reviewed comments and feedback from people who use services from surveys, speak out forums and local partnership board.

We saw evidence that staff used a variety of communication tools to engage with people and their supporters and carers.

One carer told us that they had been successfully signposted to a service that had helped provide respite care for a relative.

One carer told us there had been a best interest meeting which led to the person accessing a specialist dentist.

All carers told us they have had opportunity to give feedback on the service.

All carers told us that staff are respectful and polite.

All carers told us they knew how to raise a concern or complaint and would feel comfortable doing so.

We reviewed summary information from feedback forms from people who use the service. The following examples are from the countywide service:

“I’ve come a long way with my learning, I’ve become self-confident. I can manage things so much better now. I get on ok with my sports staff and my home tenants, and my social skills are well improved”.

“I think your services are amazing and friendly and are always willing to help those in need”.

“Happy to know there is help when I need it”.

Updated 9 January 2023

• The service did not have a complete and accessible environmental risk assessment in place.
• The service was not easily accessible to people who used wheelchairs. The fire exit was situated on the first floor and exit was via a staircase. The service did not have evacuation chairs.
• The service did not meet the target time of 18 weeks for seeing people from referral to assessment and assessment to treatment.
• The service did not ensure staff received regular supervision and appraisal.
• Managers did not receive sufficient up to date information to have oversight of specific performance areas.
• The information management system was burdensome to front line staff. Staff used a mix of electronic systems, with improvements due to take place from August 2022.

However:

• People were protected from abuse and poor care. The service had sufficient, appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.
• People received kind and compassionate care from staff who protected and respected their privacy and dignity and understood each person’s individual needs. People had their communication needs met and information was shared in a way that could be understood.
• People were involved in managing their own risks whenever possible. Staff developed positive behaviour support plans with people who used the service so that they were aware of any risks they posed to themselves, others or their environment.
• Staff were aware of what strategies to use to minimise and manage risks. Staff anticipated and managed risk. They had a high degree of understanding of peoples’ needs.
• People’s care, treatment and support plans, reflected their sensory, cognitive and functioning needs. People made choices and took part in activities which were part of their planned care and support. Staff supported them to achieve their goals.
• People who used services and those close to them were active partners in their care. We reviewed six care records and saw staff were fully committed to working in partnership with people and making this a reality for each person.
• Staff empowered people who use the service to have a voice and to realise their potential. They showed determination and creativity to overcome obstacles to delivering care.
• People were empowered to feedback on their care and support. We saw examples where staff had encouraged feedback using an easy read “we welcome your feedback” form. We also saw an easy read version of “our learning disability vision, making a better future together” that had been co-produced and set out agreed next steps for enabling people to live happy, safe and healthy lives, and to have the same life opportunities as anyone else.
• Staff understood their roles and responsibilities under the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• Staff supported people through recognised models of care and treatment for people with a learning disability or autistic people. Leadership was good, and governance processes helped the service to keep people safe, protect their human rights and provide good care, support and treatment.
• Staff worked with social care providers to ensure care was line with best practice and national guidance. For example, quality standard 101, behaviour that challenges National Institute for Heath and Care Excellence (NICE).

Updated 9 January 2023

• The service did not have a complete and accessible environmental risk assessment in place.
• The service was not easily accessible to people who used wheelchairs. The fire exit was situated on the first floor and exit was via a staircase. The service did not have evacuation chairs.
• The service did not meet the target time of 18 weeks for seeing people from referral to assessment and assessment to treatment.
• The service did not ensure staff received regular supervision and appraisal.
• Managers did not receive sufficient up to date information to have oversight of specific performance areas.
• The information management system was burdensome to front line staff. Staff used a mix of electronic systems, with improvements due to take place from August 2022.

However:

• People were protected from abuse and poor care. The service had sufficient, appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.
• People received kind and compassionate care from staff who protected and respected their privacy and dignity and understood each person’s individual needs. People had their communication needs met and information was shared in a way that could be understood.
• People were involved in managing their own risks whenever possible. Staff developed positive behaviour support plans with people who used the service so that they were aware of any risks they posed to themselves, others or their environment.
• Staff were aware of what strategies to use to minimise and manage risks. Staff anticipated and managed risk. They had a high degree of understanding of peoples’ needs.
• People’s care, treatment and support plans, reflected their sensory, cognitive and functioning needs. People made choices and took part in activities which were part of their planned care and support. Staff supported them to achieve their goals.
• People who used services and those close to them were active partners in their care. We reviewed six care records and saw staff were fully committed to working in partnership with people and making this a reality for each person.
• Staff empowered people who use the service to have a voice and to realise their potential. They showed determination and creativity to overcome obstacles to delivering care.
• People were empowered to feedback on their care and support. We saw examples where staff had encouraged feedback using an easy read “we welcome your feedback” form. We also saw an easy read version of “our learning disability vision, making a better future together” that had been co-produced and set out agreed next steps for enabling people to live happy, safe and healthy lives, and to have the same life opportunities as anyone else.
• Staff understood their roles and responsibilities under the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• Staff supported people through recognised models of care and treatment for people with a learning disability or autistic people. Leadership was good, and governance processes helped the service to keep people safe, protect their human rights and provide good care, support and treatment.
• Staff worked with social care providers to ensure care was line with best practice and national guidance. For example, quality standard 101, behaviour that challenges National Institute for Heath and Care Excellence (NICE).