Archived: Autism West Midlands

Updated 15 January 2016

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 14 September 2015 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a small supported living care service and we needed to ensure the provider had care records available for review had we required them. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors 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.

Before the inspection we looked at the information we already had about the provider. Providers are required to notify the Care Quality Commission about specific events and incidents that occur including serious injuries to people receiving care and any safeguarding matters. We refer to these as notifications. We reviewed the notifications the provider had sent us and any other information we had about the service to help us to plan the areas we were going to focus on during our inspection. We also contacted the local authority who commission services from the provider for their views.

During our inspection we spoke with the registered manager, seven members of staff, the head of supported living and the learning and development manager. After the inspection we spoke with three relatives and a healthcare professional who supported people who used the service. People who used the service were unable to verbally tell us their views of the service due to their specific conditions. We looked at records including three people’s care plans, medication records, three staff files and training records. We looked at the provider’s records for monitoring the quality of the service to see how they responded to issues raised.

Updated 15 January 2016

This inspection took place on 14 September 2015 and was announced. Autism West Midlands provides supported living services for five adults who require personal care.

There was a registered manager at the 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.

Relative’s told us that they felt their relative was safe. Staff knew how to recognise potential signs of abuse and how to raise concerns they should need to. Risks to people had been assessed and measures had been put in place to reduce the risk for the person. Staff had received training to enable them to provide safe and effective care to meet the needs of the people they were supporting.

People received their medication safely. There was information available to staff of how to support people with their medicines and only staff trained in medication were able to administer medicines to people. Audits of medication were carried out to ensure that medicines had been given safely.

Whilst most people were supported by sufficient staff, one relative we spoke with was concerned by the level of recent high staff turnover and the impact this had had on their relative. We found that the service had recently recruited a number of new staff in order to provide continuity of care to people. We saw that safe recruitment and induction processes were in place to ensure staff employed were suitable to support the people who used the service.

The registered manager and staff we spoke with were knowledgeable of and acted in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Staff we spoke with told us how they sought consent from people before supporting them.

Staff spoke enthusiastically about the people they were supporting and had a good knowledge of the person’s likes and dislikes. Although people’s views were sought on a daily basis about choices to be made there was little evidence of people being involved in their initial care plan or review of their needs. The registered manager informed us that this was carried out in an informal manner and that she was working on new systems to review care plans in a more formal manner.

We saw that people were supported to remain as independent as possible. Staff gave us examples of how they supported people on a daily basis to retain their independence and how they were helping people to achieve their aspirations and goals.

The provider was responsive to people’s needs and changed the hours they supported people when requested. There was a complaints procedure in place, although no formal complaints had been raised in the last twelve months. Where concerns were raised we saw that the registered manager had acted promptly and taken action.

Relatives we spoke with were confident in how the service was led. Staff we spoke with told us they felt valued and supported and felt able to suggest improvements for the service. There were systems in place for monitoring the quality and safety of the service.