The Community of St Antony & St Elias - 5 Priory Drive

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with senior managers at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. However, records relating to decisions made in one person's best interests were not clear. We have made a recommendation about how the service records best interests decisions.

People's healthcare needs were monitored, and people had access to healthcare professionals according to their individual needs.

Risks to people were well known and there were robust assessments to address concerns. People received personalised support centred around their support needs, preferences and choices. This was regularly reviewed with people, their relatives and professionals.

People's medicines were managed, stored and administered safely and appropriately by staff who had been trained and assessed as competent to do so.

Staff were recruited safely and there were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people's needs. Staff told us they felt supported and we saw evidence staff had received an induction, training and ongoing supervision.

There was an open and transparent culture within the service. There were effective quality assurance systems in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.