LIGHT AND HOPE

Right Support Support plans were not always kept up to date with the most recent information to support people with their care and support needs. People were not always encouraged to plan for aspirations and goals. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not always support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. The service did not provide care and support within a homely and well- maintained environment. Parts of the home needed repair and people's rooms and communal areas were not decorated in line with people's preferences or to reflect their personalities. People received their medicines as prescribed, although medicines had not been managed effectively. Staff competencies to administer medicines were reviewed.

Right care Staff acted promptly to protect people from poor care. Incidents or concerns were reported but some incidents involving people did not trigger a review of the care they received. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse. We have made a recommendation that the provider reviews themes and trends and takes appropriate action. People were not always supported through planned person-centred practices. Care and support plans did not contain personalised plans or outcomes for people with achievable goals. We have made a recommendation that the provider develops links for advocacy to ensure people have an independent voice. People were not always encouraged to take positive risks. Keyworker meetings did not support people in positive risk taking to achieve personal change or growth. Further development was required to manage risks in ways which improve the quality of life of the person, to promote their independence or to stop deterioration if possible.

Right culture People did receive good quality care in their day to day care support and treatment. People could lead more

inclusive and empowered lives which the provider continued to work towards. The quality assurance processes were not always effective and failed to identify and address shortfalls in a timely manner. Safe recruitment processes were followed to ensure suitable staff were employed.