Background to this inspection
Updated
4 December 2021
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak and to identify good practice we can share with other services.
Inspection team
Our inspection was conducted by one inspector and one Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Service and service type
Consensus (2013) Limited- 55 Headland provides care and support to people living in two supported living settings and provides an outreach service to people living in their own homes, so that they can live 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.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). This means they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
What we did before the inspection
In planning our inspection, we reviewed information we had received about the service. This included any notifications (events which happened in the service that the provider is required to tell us about) and feedback from the local authority.
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
As part of the inspection we spoke with six people using the service and five relatives. We had discussions with the registered manager and seven care and support staff.
We reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records, their risk assessments and medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. We reviewed a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including staff rotas, accident and incident analysis, the complaints log and quality assurance records.
After the inspection
We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at key policies and procedures, staff training information and governance information.
Updated
4 December 2021
About the service
Consensus (2013) Limited- 55 Headlands provides care and support to people living with learning disabilities, autism and complex needs, including Prader-Willi Syndrome. People lived in their own accommodation either in a flat within a complex, a house with shared communal areas or a flat or bungalow in the community. At the time of our inspection there were 12 people receiving support with personal care.
People’s experience of using this service
Staff were very caring and knowledgeable about how best to communicate with people and to advocate for them to ensure their views were heard. There was a strong culture within the service of treating people with dignity and respect and staff spent time getting to know people and their specific needs before they provided them with care and support.
The registered manager demonstrated an excellent understanding of the importance of effective governance processes. There was a robust monitoring system in place to check the quality of the service and to ensure people were able to express their views. Wherever possible people using the service were involved in completing these quality monitoring checks.
There was strong leadership which put people first and set high expectations for staff. They were proud to work for the service and felt valued for their work. A positive culture was demonstrated by the attitudes of staff and management when we talked with them about how they supported people.
Staff had been highly inventive and proactive supporting people throughout the pandemic to stay safe. Staff had used games, easy read information such as posters and booklets and used social stories to help people understand more about COVID-19 and why restrictions had been in place.
There were comprehensive systems in place to make sure the service was safe. People were empowered to take positive risks, to ensure they had greater choice and control of their lives. The positive risk-taking approach showed staff respected people's right for independence and their right to take risks.
People were fully involved and supported to recruit staff and were able to choose the staff who they wanted to care for them. This ensured that successful applicants had the right values and skills to match the values that were at the heart of the service.
Training was developed around each individual to ensure staff had an excellent understanding of people’s needs and how to meet them. People’s health and well-being were paramount. Staff liaised with health and social care professionals to ensure excellent outcomes for people and had used innovative ways to help people overcome their anxieties about visiting health professionals such as a dentist.
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.
People had a very detailed assessment of their needs that was completed by using different communication aids before they used the service. They were actively involved in their assessment so they could make choices about the support they needed and wanted. There were comprehensive transition plans in place to ensure people experienced a positive experience when they started to receive care.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.
The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.
Right support: People were supported to have choice and control of their lives. The model of care maximised people’s choice inclusion and independence.
Right care: People received truly person-centred care that was bespoke to them and based around their individual needs, dreams and aspirations.
Right culture: The registered manager and staff promoted a very positive, transparent and open culture. There was a strong culture within the service of treating people with dignity and respect and staff spent time getting to know people and their specific needs before they provided them with care and support.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection:
The last rating for the service under the previous provider was Outstanding, rating published on 19/12/2019.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection following a new registration.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.