Creative Support - Dudley & Sandwell Services

The service supports adults with learning disabilities, mental health conditions, and physical disabilities to live independently in their own homes.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and how they managed deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) within the service. We found staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of MCA and were able to explain the process for making best interest decisions when required. Staff provided examples of how they supported people to make choices in their day-to-day lives. On member of staff told us, “I show [person] different clothes options each day, [person] either pushes the option away or smiles. The same with food I show [person] options of food, [person] expresses their preference through their body language.” This shows people were supported to make their own decisions wherever possible and staff recognised methods of communication when seeking consent and offering choice.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disabilityrespect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.Care and support were delivered in line with the principles of Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture. Staff understood people's individual needs and worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals and other agencies to achieve positive outcomes. People were supported to access their local communities, pursue meaningful activities and maintain important relationships.

The service had effective systems and processes in place to support people’s safety, wellbeing and quality of life. People were protected from avoidable harm through robust safeguarding practices, safe recruitment processes, effective risk management, and safe medicines management. Staffing arrangements were sufficient to meet people’s needs, and staff were appropriately trained, supervised and supported in their roles.

People received person-centred care that reflected their individual needs, preferences and aspirations. Care plans and risk assessments were detailed, regularly reviewed and supported people to maintain choice, control and independence. Where people lacked capacity to make specific decisions, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act were followed, and best interest decisions were made appropriately.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the care provided and described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Staff knew people well and promoted dignity, independence and inclusion. People and those important to them were involved in care planning and reviews and were encouraged to provide feedback about the service.

The service was well-led. Leaders were visible, approachable and promoted an open and positive culture. One staff member told us, “[Manager] is very lovely, I am treated fairly and equally, especially by [manager].” Another staff member told us, “It's good. The managers are accessible, we work as a team, our seniors our managers they are brilliant they are good. I feel as though the managers listen to me and they act on what is being shared with them.”

Effective governance systems, audits and quality assurance processes supported oversight of the service, drove continuous improvement and ensured learning from incidents, feedback and good practice was identified and embedded.