Your Life Care Solutions

Your Life Care Solutions is a supported living service which provides personal care to people in their own homes. The service comprises of a mixture of single and shared accommodation in the Colchester area. The largest property being a six-bedroom country house, which also included an office and training room for staff.

The age group of the 18 people using the service, ranged between 18 – 29 years at the time of the inspection.

The service has been developed and designed in line with 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

Relatives told us they would recommend the service to others, one told us they would, “Most definitely,” recommend the service, “I am really pleased and its really well run…very good at communicating... very good with all the service users, running really well.”

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

People were supported by staff who knew their needs well and had received training and understood how to report abuse. The provider took learning from any safeguarding incidents, to reduce the risk of it happening again. There were safe systems in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.

There were suitable numbers of staff who had been recruited safely to meet people’s contracted hours. The provider had assessed the risk to people associated with their care and support, including risks associated with their health and environment. Staff were knowledgeable about these risks and knew what to do to minimise risk, whilst promoting independence.

New staff received a comprehensive induction, which included getting to know the needs of the people they would be supporting. Systems were in place to ensure staff received ongoing training to keep their skills updated and reflected best practice. Staff felt well supported and benefited from having their own in-house trainer, who had an in-depth knowledge of the people they supported. This meant they could tailor the training to support people’s individual needs.

Staff demonstrated a good insight into people’s nutritional needs. People were supported to choose, shop and where possible, prepare their meals.

Management and staff we spoke with, were knowledgeable about people’s care and support needs and what was important to them. We observed good, caring, person focused interaction from staff who were motivated and enjoyed their work, which enhanced people’s wellbeing. It reflected what relatives and professionals told us, and our own observation. Staff respected people’s privacy and encouraged independence.

Systems were in place to ensure people received a comprehensive assessment and person-centred support, as they made the transition from family carer/education to supported living. People’s support plans provided staff clear with guidance on what was important to the person and the level of support they required to meet their holistic needs and goals. Staff were aware of people’s individual communication needs, including the aids they used to support them in having a voice and making their needs known.

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.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

The provider and registered manager were aware of their responsibilities and acted on improvements they had identified through outcomes of safeguards, quality and safety audits. People, relatives and staff had a say in how the service was run and felt listened to. The leadership fostered an open and honest culture and were motivated in listening and acting on feedback to drive continual improvements. The provider worked well with external agencies and organisations to support people’s health and wellbeing.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 19 January 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.

Your Life Care Solutions is a supported living service which provides personal care to eighteen people in their own homes. The service comprises of four sites in the Colchester area.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

People were kept safe from the possible risk of harm. People’s behavioural needs had been identified and appropriate measures were in place to help staff to manage any behaviour which might have a negative impact upon others. They were treated with dignity and respect and cared for by staff who knew and understood their needs. People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care and support, including choosing their menus. Their healthcare needs were assessed and the service worked closely with other professionals to ensure that people had the correct support to maintain their health and welfare. The provider had a safe system for the management and administration of medicines

People had their care needs assessed, reviewed and detailed in comprehensive and person-centred care plans. They were supported to pursue their social interests and hobbies and to participate in activities in and out of the service. There was a complaints policy in place to handle and resolve any complaints.

There were enough staff available to meet the needs of people using the service. All pre-employment checks were carried out by the provider to ensure that staff were recruited safely and were suitable for the post before commencing their role.

Staff had a comprehensive induction when they joined the service and received a variety of training which was relevant to their role. They showed understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and sought consent from people before providing care. Staff were regularly supervised and had their performance appraised by management. The staff team knew and understood people’s needs and had developed meaningful relationships with them. People were encouraged to work towards positive outcomes and objectives.

The service held residents meetings, sent satisfaction surveys and worked closely with other agencies involved in people’s care to ensure that they were satisfied with the service received. There was a robust system for quality assurance in place which identified improvements that could be made across the service. Staff were positive about the management and culture of the service and felt they were supported to develop. The systems in place for ensuring compliance and the knowledge base of the manager helped drive continual improvement in important areas.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our conversations with the manager, three staff and three relatives and from looking at records. Where it was not possible to communicate with people who used the service we used our observations to gather information.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that staff showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. Relatives commented, 'The staff are good I have confidence in them. '

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service safe?

People were cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. Staff had received appropriate training and guidance.

Records contained detailed assessments of people's needs that had been carried out prior to them moving to the service. Any training needed for staff to support people safely was identified and provided prior to the person moving to the service and if their needs changed. This ensured that the staff had the relevant skills and knowledge required to meet the individual's identified needs.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve. One person said, 'I feel my relative is safe here the staff are very responsive to their needs.'

Is the service effective?

It was clear from what we saw and from speaking with staff that they understood people's care and support needs and that they knew the people well. Relatives we spoke with told us that, 'Staff had excellent knowledge about the people they support.'

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary needs had been identified in care plans where required. People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

The training that staff had received equipped them to meet the needs of the people who used the service. Staff were aware of people's preferred method of communication such as pictures and symbols that they used to obtain people's consent before providing care and treatment.

Is the service responsive?

The manager had regular contact with the relatives of people who used the service. People told us that they had specific agreements regarding frequency of contact. One relative told us, 'The manager had agreed with me that they would text me daily updates about my [relative], which they have done.'

Monthly keyworker meetings took place where people had an opportunity to provide feedback on the service. We noted that the monthly keyworker report addressed any compliments or concerns raised by the people who used the service, relatives and feedback from professionals.

Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.

Is the service well led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

The service had a quality assurance system. Records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuously improving.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and that they received excellent support and supervision from the manager. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the service. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.

We found that staff communicated with people well. Pictoral cards were used to help people make their own lifestyle choices. We saw evidence that people were supported to engage in the activities they preferred. During our inspection, one person requested to be driven to a nearby town to pick up shopping catalogues for their art work.

We saw that appropriate measures had been taken to ensure that staff employed were suitable to be working with vulnerable young adults. Training records demonstrated that staff had benefited from professional development which supported them to meet the needs of the people using the service.

We found that staff communicated with people well. Pictoral cards were used to help people make their own lifestyle choices. We saw evidence that people were supported to engage in the activities they preferred. During our inspection, one person requested to be driven to a nearby town to pick up shopping catalogues for their art work.

Staff had received mandatory and additional training which enabled them to support people with certain medical conditions. There were adequate numbers of staff available to give the right level of support to people currently using the service. We reviewed the way that medicines were managed and found that adequate safeguards were in place to administer people's medication.