Creative Support - Sheffield Service

This service provides care and support to people living in 'supported living' settings, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people's personal care and support. Sheffield Services has four supported living locations, referred to as Burncross Road, Melrose Road, Daresbury Road and Mansfield View. Burncross Road comprises of two houses and can support up to 10 people. Melrose Road is a large house over three floors and can support up to three people. Daresbury Road is large house over three floors and can support up to three people. Mansfield View comprises of four bungalows and can support up to 13 people. The bungalows are arranged around a small courtyard area and the management team office is annexed to Mansfield View. Mansfield View was previously called 'Supported Living Service'. Each supported living location had a team of on-site staff who provided 24-hour support, seven days per week. At the time of the inspection there were 26 people living in Sheffield Services' supported living locations.

Sheffield Services also provides a community-based outreach service offering support to people in their own homes. However, at the time of this inspection the outreach service was not providing a regulated activity to the 12 people who used the service and therefore was not assessed as part of this inspection.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities in protecting people from abuse and the service had appropriate systems in place to promote people's safety. We found medicines were generally managed in a safe way, though some minor improvements were required with medicines management audits and the detail contained in people's PRN protocols. After the inspection, we received assurances from the provider they had addressed these concerns.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and they felt supported by the management team. All staff had received training and supervision to help them to carry out their roles effectively. However, not all staff received supervisions at the frequency as set out in the provider's policies and procedures. We identified improvements were needed to staff training records at Mansfield View. Personal care observations had not been completed to check staff competency in this area. After the inspection, we received assurances from the provider they had addressed these concerns. We need to see evidence of these improvements at the next inspection.

On the day of the inspection we found there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs and it was evident that staff had been safely recruited. We found people generally received support from the same staff which promoted good continuity of care. Agency staff were occasionally used to maintain safe staffing levels at the service and systems were in place to ensure all agency staff received an induction before providing care and support to people. The provider was actively trying to reduce agency usage by recruiting new staff.

The people we spoke with told us the standard of care they received was good. The service encouraged people to maintain a healthy diet and worked collaboratively with external services to promote people's wellbeing. 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 support this practice.

We observed staff were caring and always listened. We saw care records contained details about people's likes and dislikes so their personhood was promoted and respected. Staff knew people well and positive, caring relationships had been developed. People and their representatives were encouraged to express their views and they were involved in decisions about their care. People's privacy and dignity was respected and promoted. The service provided a programme of activities to suit people's preferences. We observed people had regular opportunities to access the community.

We found a strong leadership framework in place. This meant there was clear lines of accountability within the organisation and systems which supported the running of the service were well-embedded.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found