Shaftesbury Beaumont Court

Livability Beaumont Court is a supported living service providing personal care to up to 8 people. The service provides support to people living with a learning disability and/or physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 8 people using the service.

People’s experience of the service and what we found:

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people. We considered this guidance as there were people using the service who have a learning disability and or who are autistic.

Right support.

People were supported and encouraged to maintain their independence, as far as possible. Staff had a good understanding of people’s likes and dislikes and encouraged people to participate in their care.

Right care.

People were well cared for and were treated with dignity and respect. Staff spoke fondly of the people they supported and considered the service to be like a ‘family’ unit. People had a good relationship with staff and looked happy and relaxed.

Right Culture.

People were supported to be as active and independent as possible. They were encouraged to participate in activities and were supported to contribute to daily tasks, such as cooking and shopping. People were supported to maintain contact with family and friends.

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.

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 20 July 2018).

Why we inspected

We undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. For those key question not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Livability Beaumont Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow Up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

This was the first comprehensive inspection of the service since it had been acquired by the provider Livability.

Livability Beaumont Court provides care and support to people living in supported living, 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.

The service is close to the centre of Prudhoe and had been divided into two houses separated by a central staff area used as an office and staff sleeping room. Each house could accommodate four people. At the time of our inspection seven people were using the service. One person had been identified to move into the vacancy and they were in the process of introductions to the service.

The care service has been developed 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.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy.

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.

Staff had been trained and assessed as competent to administer people’s medicines. The service had signed up to a national initiative called STOMP-LD (Stopping over-medication of people with learning disabilities).

There were enough staff on duty to support people needs. Staff underwent a robust recruitment process. Once in post they were supported using an induction process, training, supervision and appraisal. Agency staff who were employed in the service also underwent an induction.

Staff understood the personal risks to each person who used the service including living at Beaumont Court and accessing the community. These risks included information from other professionals to keep people safe.

House meetings were arranged by staff to engage people in the service. People had monthly meetings with their keyworkers using a pictorial format to review their needs and their satisfaction with the service.

Records showed staff supported people’s tenancies and attended to repairs and redecoration of their homes.

People’s human rights were protected by staff who promoted their right to family life and access to medical service to promote their health and well-being. Staff enabled people to access their community. They encouraged and supported people to continue relationships and activities that were important to them.

Staff had been trained in safeguarding and felt able to discuss any concerns with the registered manager.

The provider had a staff disciplinary policy in place to address any staff behaviour which was not acceptable.

People had their own menu’s in place which reflected their personal tastes. Pictures were available for people to choose their menu the week before they assisted with shopping.

The service had engaged professionals from different disciplines to support people’s needs and included their advice in people’s care plans.

Staff supported people with kindness and patience. They respected people’s choices and encouraged them to be as independent as possible. When people had made choices, which were important to them staff had advocated on their behalf to their family members about what each person wanted to do.

Records in the home were up to date and accurately reflected people’s needs. Care plans and risk assessments provided guidance to staff on to provide each person’s individual care.

Systems were in place for the provider and the registered manager to effectively to monitor the quality of the service. There was a culture of continuous improvement embedded in the service.