Initial Care Services South East Limited

Updated 24 June 2024

Date of assessment: 23 September to 03 October 2024. An assessment has been undertaken of a specialist service that is used by autistic people or people with a learning disability. We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found 5 breaches of legal regulations in relation to safeguarding, safe care and treatment, staffing, need for consent and good governance. The provider’s safeguarding processes were not effective in recognising and acting on all safeguarding concerns raised by people. Risks to people were not always effectively identified and assessed. The provider did not have effective systems and processes in place to ensure staff competencies were appropriately checked and monitored.. The provider did not ensure people’s mental capacity was adequately assessed and that they supported people to fully engage in the assessments. People were at risk of their rights not always being upheld and their unwise decisions not being respected. The provider’s systems and processes did not fully consider national best practice guidance on supporting people with learning disability and autistic people, for example around assessing their needs, wishes and experiences of living with a learning disability. This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we user our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.

Updated 24 June 2024

During the assessment, we reviewed how the model of care maximised people’s choice, control and independence; if people’s care was person-centred and promoted people’s dignity, privacy and human rights and how the service ensured ensure people using services lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives. Although people and people’s relatives told us they were in general happy with the care provided by the service, the processes and systems and staff’s understanding of how to support people with a learning disability were not always in line with regulatory requirements and best practice. People’s relatives told us the service has improved because of their previous feedback. People’s relatives told us they had no concerns around how the service planned people’s care and supported them when their needs were changing, how they were involved in their care and that they felt safe with staff. However, the provider did not always recognise when people’s feedback to staff amounted to safeguarding concerns and failed to take appropriate action to report, investigate and action feedback to protect people. People’s relatives told us they found staff to be competent, that they visited on time, provided care as planned and followed good infection prevention and control practice. They also said they could see the care provided had positive impact on people’s health and overall wellbeing. However, the provider failed to recognise and mitigate all risks to people and to ensure they followed Mental Capacity Act Code of Practice.