Archived: The Quays

Updated 18 August 2018

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.

The inspection included visits to the agency’s office on 14 and 18 June 2018. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a service for younger adults in a supported living setting. We needed to be sure that someone would be in the office. One adult social care inspector carried out the inspection.

To help us to plan and identify areas to focus on in the inspection we considered all the information we held about the service. This including notifications submitted to us by the registered provider, and information gained from people who had contacted CQC to share feedback about the service. A Provider Information Return (PIR) had been sent to the registered provider for completion. This was returned within the timescale requested. The PIR is a form that asks the registered provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During our inspection we visited the supported living setting and spoke with three of the people who were using the service. We also spoke with staff and managers including two directors of the company, the registered manager, the service manager, support workers and one visiting relative. We requested the views of other agencies that worked with the service, such as two social care professionals who had ongoing involvement with people who used the service. The feedback we received is reflected in and informed our report.

We looked at documentation relating to people who used the service, the staff and the management of the service. We checked two people’s care and support records including their person-centred plans, risk assessments, health and day to day records. We looked at four staff files, which included recruitment, training and support records.

Updated 18 August 2018

The Quays provides personal care to people living in the community in the Doncaster area. Support packages are flexible and based on people’s assessed needs. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting five people. All of whom were quite young and were living with autism.

The service provides care and support to people living in a ‘supported living’ setting, 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.

The service was not operating for around 18 months, during which time it was redesigned and was registered to provide support to people living in supported living settings. The supported living service started operating in September 2017.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 14 and 18 June 2018. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides services in people’s home and we needed to be sure that someone would be at the office.

At the last inspection in August 2015 the service was rated good. You can read the report from our last inspections, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘The Quays’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

At this inspection we found that evidence continued to support the rating of good with an outstanding rating in the responsive domain (question).

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People’s rights and choices were promoted and a positive approach to risk taking meant people could lead fulfilled lives and seek new opportunities.

Staff were trained in safeguarding (protecting people who use care services from abuse) and knew what to do if they were concerned about the welfare of any person who used the service. People were safely supported with their medicines. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and it was evident that staff had been safely recruited, with people who used the service having a say as to the staff appointed.

The service supported people to maintain a healthy diet and people who required the involvement of health care professionals were assisted to obtain this. Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and had received support, training and supervision to help them to carry out their support role effectively. 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.

People said they were treated with respect and dignity, and staff supported them in a way which met their needs. People’s care and support was exceptionally personalised and this meant that people were at the centre of their care. We found very clear evidence that people’s care and support was planned and reviewed with them and not for them.

It was evident that staff worked hard to provide people with the support they needed to have a good and active lifestyle that suited their individual and cultural needs and aspirations. Staff were very committed to the promotion of people’s rights and supported people to celebrate their diversity. People were supported to use public transport and to travel independently. This had increased their ability to be involved in the local community and gain useful life skills. Other benefits included increased access to their employment, education and leisure activities, as well as the boost in self-esteem, confidence and independence that came with this.

People were supported to follow their hobbies and interests and take part in activities that they liked and were socially and culturally relevant and appropriate to them. They received exceptionally effective support to have access to the wider community, adult education and paid and voluntary work opportunities. People were supported to achieve their aspirations and to continuously develop new goals, as they grew in confidence and became more adventurous.

There was an effective and accessible complaints procedure. Additionally, people’s views were actively sought and they were encouraged to comment and influence how the service operated. People, and those who were important to them, were routinely consulted about their satisfaction in the service they received. People’s comments and ideas were used to develop and improve the service. There was an effective system to monitor the quality of service delivery and of staff performance. The quality of the care and support people received was continually kept under review.

The culture and ethos within the service was that of honesty, growth and empowerment. This was achieved by encouraging people’s involvement and ensuring they had access to information which supported and promoted their equality, diversity and human rights. Best practice guidelines were followed and staff were committed to the vision and values of the service. They had a comprehensive understanding of the legislation and policies that underpinned their approach to people’s care and support. It was also evident that the team worked well in partnership with other professionals, to provide a person-centred service that met people’s needs.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.