Camphill Milton Keynes Communities

Camphill Milton Keynes Communities provide personal care and support to people living within the Camphill Community. It is a community setting of ten houses with its own shop, café, bakery, theatre, workshops for people using the service to attend and horticulture gardens. At the time of our visit there were 62 people being supported within the Camphill Community.

This service provides care and support to people living in 10 houses on the same site 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 had not originally been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. However, people were given choices and their independence and participation within the local community encouraged.

At our last inspection we rated the service Good. 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.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People continued to receive safe care. Staff had been provided with safeguarding training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report them. There were detailed risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety. Staffing numbers were sufficient to keep people safe and the registered provider followed thorough recruitment procedures to ensure staff employed were suitable for their role.

People’s medicines were managed safely and in line with best practice guidelines. Systems were in place to ensure that people were protected by the prevention and control of infection. Accidents and incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence.

People’s needs and choices were assessed and their care provided in line with their preferences. Staff received an induction process when they first commenced work at the service and received on-going training to ensure they could provide care based on current practice when supporting people. People received enough to eat and drink and were supported to use and access a variety of other services and social care professionals. People were supported to access health appointments when required, including opticians and doctors, to make sure they received continuing healthcare to meet their needs.

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. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People continued to receive care from staff who were kind and caring. People were encouraged to make decisions about how their care was provided and their privacy and dignity were protected and promoted. People had developed positive relationships with staff who had a good understanding of their needs and preferences.

People’s needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person and or their family members where required. Staff promoted and respected people's cultural diversity and lifestyle choices. Care plans were personalised and provided staff with guidance about how to support people and respect their wishes. The provider had implemented innovative ways to ensure communication was accessible to people in a format that met their needs.

The service continued to be well managed. People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive improvement. Staff felt well-supported and received supervision that gave them an opportunity to share ideas, and exchange information. Effective systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided through a range of internal checks and audits. The registered manager was aware of their responsibility to report events that occurred within the service to the CQC and external agencies.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an 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 service.

Camphill Milton Keynes Communities provide personal care and support to people living within the Camphill Community. It is a community setting of ten houses with its own shop, café, bakery, theatre, workshops for people using the service to attend and horticulture gardens. At the time of our visit there were 52 people being supported within the Camphill Community.

There was a registered manger 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 felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report them. People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as they could be.

There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their needs. Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the service for both employed and volunteer staff.

Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. People received their medicines safely when they required them.

Staff received a comprehensive induction process and on-going training. They were well supported by the registered manager and the care and support team manager and had regular one to one time for supervisions. Staff had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when supporting people.

Staff gained consent before supporting people. People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were knowledgeable of this guidance and correct processes were in place to protect people.

People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff gave support when required, and encouraged people to have a healthy balanced diet.

People were supported to access a variety of health professional when required, including dentist, opticians and doctors, to meet individual health needs.

Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well.

People and relatives where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

People were supported to follow their interests and hobbies.

A complaints procedure was in place and accessible to all. People knew how to complain.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, their relatives, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service caring?

People who used the service had their needs assessed and we found that up to date support plans and risk assessments were in use. These had recently been reviewed to ensure they reflected people's current needs.

We observed staff show patience and understanding when interacting with people, encouraging their independence.

Is the service responsive?

A family member told us, 'It has made our daughter independent.' Another said, 'We have really been impressed, if there were any concerns, they were always sorted.'

People were assisted to enjoy activities of their choice, with support where required.

Is the service safe?

We found that records relevant to the management of the service were accurate and fit for purpose. These were kept securely and updated when required.

There was a robust medication policy. Medication was stored, administered and recorded in line with this.

People who used the service had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as possible.

Is the service effective?

People were involved in the planning and review of their care and signed to consent to this. Documentation was available in a pictorial format to aid understanding.

There was an advocacy service available if people needed it. This meant that when people required additional support it was available.

Is the service well led?

A registered manager was in post, supported by a management team. Quality assurance processes were in place to ensure people received a quality service.

People told us that they were happy living at the service and enjoyed doing the activities that were provided. They also told us that the staff encouraged them to develop their skills in areas such as bread baking, weaving blankets, attending a theatre group and producing a newsletter about the service. One person told us that they had undertaken a qualification in bread and cake making and were proud of their achievements and enjoyed making bread. People also told us that they had regular community meetings and discussed any concerns they had about living at the home. One person told us that everybody at the service was respected and valued and they were happy living within the Camphill Community.

We found that people were respected and involved in their care planning and received care that met their individual needs. We also found that the staff received the appropriate training, support and development to meet people's needs. However, we had some concerns that the provider did not have adequate systems in place to manage people's medicines and accurate records were not always maintained.

We spoke with three staff members who all spoke very highly of the service. One staff member told us 'The service gives people the chance to be as independent as possible'.

We found that people were involved with decisions about their care and support. We saw that risks had been assessed and ways to manage risks identified. We found that all of the necessary pre-employment checks took place prior to staff commencing work.

We saw that the provider had detailed safeguarding and complaints policies in place. We saw that the provider ensured that any comments, concerns or allegations were referred appropriately and followed through.