Archived: Creative Support - Wigan Service

Updated 23 November 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 checked 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 26, 29 and 30 October 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 24hours notice because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care and we needed to be sure they would be in. We visited the office location on 26 October to see the manager and office staff; and to review care records. We conducted two home visits on 29 October 2018 and made phone calls to people's relatives and staff on 30 October.

The inspection was completed by one adult social care inspector from the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Prior to the inspection we reviewed all of the information we held about the service in the form of notifications, previous inspection reports, expected/unexpected deaths and safeguarding incidents. We contacted commissioners to establish if they had any information to share with us.

As part of the inspection, we met with the registered manager, completed home visits to two of the nine services which each provided a supported living service to four people. We spoke with five staff both in the properties we visited and on the telephone.

Records looked at included four care plans, two medicine administration records (MAR), four staff personnel files, training records for the staff team and the service's policies and procedures. This helped inform our inspection judgements.

Updated 23 November 2018

Creative Support Wigan Ltd provides a supported living service to 26 people with learning disabilities in nine properties, which varied in size and included single person tenancies and shared properties for up to four tenants.

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.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 registered manager is currently off work temporarily, their role has been covered by another registered manager from within the organisation. Staff we spoke with reported this had been effective and they felt they had enough support from the management team.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People continued to be protected from the risk of harm and abuse. The service had clear safeguarding policies and procedures in place which had been followed when required. Staff knew how to recognise and raise any concerns.

Risk assessments identified the support people needed to manage the specific risks in their daily lives. Though some of the paperwork could have been clearer to follow, everything had been considered. The service continued to consider the impact on people's liberty and rights when supporting them to manage risks.

Staffing had been maintained at a safe level. The service reviewed the level of staffing regularly in response to changes in people's needs.

Medicines continued to be managed safely.

Emergency plans were in place and ensured staff knew how to respond to events including fires. Everyone living in the service had a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan. (PEEP)

Infection control policies continued to protect people from the risk of infection and cross contamination.

Assessments identified people's needs prior to admission to the service. This ensured the service could be confident they were able to meet people's needs.

Staff training remained up to date which ensured staff had the appropriate skills and knowledge to support people effectively.

People continued to receive support with their nutrition and hydration. Advice and guidance from related professionals had been included in the support plans.

In addition to information about health needs and diagnoses people had hospital passports and health action plans, which ensured they were supported effectively should they need to access health services.

The two properties we visited had been adapted to ensure they were accessible. Further development had been undertaken to respond to the specific needs of individuals. Eg, sensory area in one of the properties.

The service continued to work within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS). Staff understood the importance of achieving consent prior to providing care and support.

Staff were observed to interact with people and each other in kind and caring ways. The service had clear values in relation to supporting people to maintain their privacy, dignity and respect. Staff were skilled in ensuring these were achieved.

Communication guides were detailed and ensured people were supported to express their views and wishes. People living in the service were encouraged to be involved in decisions and had support from advocacy services when required.

People continued to receive person centred care which was responsive to their individual needs and preferences. Details about the individual, their background and cultural identity had been recorded together with details of the support people needed to maintain these needs.

People had access to a broad range of activities which reflected their recorded preferences. In addition shared social activities were arranged including parties and trips out.

The service had a complaints policy had been followed when required. People were supported to share their views about the quality of the service they received. Compliments were recorded and shared with the staff.

The service continued to promote values based on achieving high quality support and positive outcomes for people who used the service. Staff were aware of the standards expected of them and spoke about their commitment to achieving them.

There was a clear management structure which identified the roles and responsibilities of each member of the team. Senior staff were supported to manage delegated responsibilities in the individual properties.

Regular audits continued to ensure good governance. Quality assurance visits were completed with local commissioners. Regular checks of care records ensured information was up to date. Any concerns had been identified and addressed to prevent reoccurrence.

Team meetings were held regularly, including large meetings of the whole team and individual meetings in the separate properties. The management team also met regularly. This ensured people had the opportunity to share knowledge and keep up to date with any changes.

The service continued to work closely with their partners and stakeholders to share skills and knowledge and maintain the quality of the service.