In House Care

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. 'Right support, right care, right culture' is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

Right Care: Care was not always person-centred, however people's dignity, privacy and human rights were considered and planned into care. Staff had not received training in supporting people with a learning disability but had completed an autism awareness course.

Right Culture: The ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff did not always ensure people using services lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives. People and their relatives were not always informed in changes to when their care would be delivered.

Risk assessments and associated care plans did not always contain consistent information to support staff to mitigate risk. There was not always enough staff to meet people's needs, and medicines were not always managed safely. People were protected from the risk of abuse by staff who had been recruited safely. People were protected from the risk of infection as staff had access to personal protective equipment [PPE] and understood the latest guidance. Incidents and accidents were recorded and monitored for trends and patterns.

Staff did not always have the training skills and experience to meet people's needs. Records for transition into other health care services needed some improvement but staff had worked in partnership with other

health care professionals to meet people's health care needs. People were well supported with fluid, hydration and specialist feeding regimes.

Systems and processes had not consistently identified errors and concerns, where they had, corrections had not been made prior to the inspection. People were not always informed about changes in their planned care and did not always feel listened to. The provider was planning improvements to care records to provide clearer guidance for staff and had recruited new staff to the office to support recruitment and training. People spoke positively of the branch manager who was due to register with the Care Quality Commission and felt improvements had started to be made.

People did not always feel well supported due to staff skills and experience, but they had developed friendly relationships with staff who were kind and caring. Religion and culture were recorded in care records but there was a lack of guidance for staff on how to support people. People were involved in writing and reviewing their care plans and their privacy dignity and independence was respected and supported.

Care planning needed some improvement to ensure people received person centred-care that fully met their needs. People had a mixed experience of how the provider and management team managed their concerns but there was evidence that formal complaints were responded to in line with the providers policy and procedure. Staff were trained in end of life care and end of life wishes were recorded.

People's needs were assessed before they joined the service and people who lacked capacity were supported by staff with a good understanding in this area. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.