Barclay Services

Barclay Services is a supported living service which provides personal care and support to people with learning disabilities and or autistic people, who were living in their own tenancies in the community. At the time of the inspection, the service supported 9 people who were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.

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.

People were supported by a consistent, experienced and competent staff team who had been recruited safely, and who knew them well. Whilst staff were aware of known risks in relation to people’s care and support, guidance for staff was not consistently detailed. This put people at potential risk of harm.

People could experience periods of emotional distress. Risks in how people were to be safely supported at these times were not consistently assessed and planned for. Whilst the provider ensured staff received accredited refresher training in how to support people with emotional distress, improvements into positive behaviour support approaches were identified as an area to improve. The management team told us they planned to seek support from the local authority positive behaviour support team, for additional guidance and support.

The provider was in the process of further developing their learning culture. However, we identified not enough improvements in incident analysis to identify themes, patterns, trends and learning opportunities, had been made since our last inspection.

Staff received ongoing training and support. Whilst staff were positive about the support they received; records found the service was not consistently meeting the provider’s compliance expectations.

Staff received ongoing safeguarding training and understood their roles and responsibilities to protect people from risks and avoidable harm. People had access to safeguarding information and received opportunities to support their awareness of what safeguarding means.

Overall, improvements to medicines management procedures had been made. However, we identified some shortfalls that whilst had not impacted people’s safety, identified governance checks needed further improvements.

People were supported to maintain their tenancies. Staff assisted people with health and safety checks, and the reporting of any housing repairs to the housing provider. Infection prevention and control best practice guidance was being followed.

People were supported with their health conditions and in attending health appointments and screening. However, information about known health conditions were not consistently recorded. Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions needed some further improvements to ensure the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was fully adhered to.

People received kind, caring and compassionate care. Staff spoke positively about the people they cared for, demonstrating a professional, respectful approach, valuing people’s difference and uniqueness. People’s independence and choice making was consistently embedded in staff’s approach to support.

People were supported with their routines, preferences, interests and hobbies. This included accessing the community regularly. People’s communication needs were assessed and planned for. People received opportunities to share their experience about the service.

People were supported to identify goals important to them and support plans were outcome based. However, there lacked effective procedures to show how, and if, people had achieved their outcomes.

Staff were positive about working for the provider. They told us they felt valued, listened to and treated equally.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation the management of people’s medicines. Overall, there were enough improvements found at this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance and as not enough improvements were found at this inspection, the provider remained in breach of this regulation. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.