Outreach Teeside

Updated 11 December 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 was planned to check 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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 6 and 8 November 2018. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of our inspection because it is a small service and we needed to be sure someone would be available to assist us with the inspection. Inspection activity started on 6 November 2018 and ended on 8 November 2018. It included visiting the service’s office, visiting people in their own homes with their permission and telephone calls to relatives. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before our inspection, we looked at information we held about the service. Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually 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 made the judgements in this report. We reviewed the information we held about the service, such as the notifications we had received from the registered manager. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

We contacted the commissioners of the relevant local authorities, the local authority safeguarding team and other professionals who worked with the service to gain their views of the care provided by Outreach Teeside. During the inspection we spoke with two people who receive personal care from the service and four relatives of people using the service. We looked at three plans of support and three people’s medicine records. We spoke with seven members of staff, including the registered manager who acted as an area manager, two managers of different parts of the service, one senior support worker and three support workers. We looked at four staff files, which included some recruitment records. We also reviewed a range of records involved with the day to day running and quality monitoring of the service.

Updated 11 December 2018

This inspection took place on 6 and 8 November 2018 October and was announced because Outreach Teeside provides personal care to people with a diagnosis of autism and/or learning disabilities in their own homes.

Not everyone using Outreach Teeside received a regulated activity. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspected the services being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene, nutrition and medicines.15 people were being supported with their personal care by the service at the time of this inspection. Seven people were living in their own homes with their families and eight people were living in ‘supported living’ settings 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 care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values included choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. Registering the Right Support CQC policy.

We rated the service as good at its last inspection. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

A registered manager was in post. Positive feedback was received about the leadership and management of the service. Staff received the training and support they required to be effective in their roles. Sufficient staff were employed to meet people’s needs. Recruitment policies minimised the risk of unsuitable staff being employed.

Risks to people were assessed along with the actions staff should take to reduce the risks identified. Staff knew how to safeguard vulnerable adults and were aware of the action they should take if they had any concerns. Medicines were managed safely. However, improvements could be made to how recordings were made on medicine administration records to make records easier to read. People living in supported living houses were encouraged to carry out their own health and safety checks.

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 supported this practice. However, some additional work was required in the recording of best interest decisions where people were unable to make their own decisions. Staff supported people to maintain their health and access healthcare services when needed.

People’s independence was promoted. People accessed a range of community and leisure facilities. Staff respected people’s rights and maintained their privacy. Relatives and people told us staff were caring. Support was planned and delivered based upon people’s support needs and preferences. Staff knew the people they were supporting very well.

People and their relatives told us they knew how to complain if it was needed. A governance system was in place to monitor the quality of the service. However, information regarding the actions that had been taken following issues been identified within audits was sometimes difficult to locate. The registered manager told us they were aware that this was an area that required further development.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.