Archived: Gloucestershire Autism Services Also known as Cheltenham Supported Living

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

At our last inspection on 8 September 2015 this service was rated as requires improvement overall. We asked the provider to take action to make improvements to:

• information detailing how to keep people safe, such as risk assessments and medicines records,

• people’s care records to make sure they had been kept up to date with any changes

and these actions had been met.

People received individualised care which reflected their personal wishes, preferences and routines which were particularly important to them. Staff understood and promoted people’s individual lifestyle choices and how they wished to live their lives. They respected people’s choices and their right to refuse care or support. Staff supported people when anxious or upset and knew what could cause them anxiety and how to anticipate their emotions. People’s communication needs were understood and promoted using accessible information and sign language they understood. People had positive relationships with staff who treated them in a kindly and friendly manner.

People were supported to stay well. Their physical, mental and emotional needs were clearly highlighted in their care records. These were kept up to date and amended to reflect any changes in their needs. People had access to a range of health care professionals. Their dietary needs were considered and they made choices about what they drank and ate. People unable to make decisions about their care were supported in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and when needed decisions were made in their best interests by people who knew them well. People were kept safe from harm. Any risks were minimised and staff understood how to recognise suspected abuse and what action to take to keep people safe.

People were supported by staff who had been thoroughly recruited and did not work with them until all checks had been completed. Staff had access to a range of training to equip them with the skills and knowledge they needed to support people. Staff said they felt supported in their roles with access to the registered manager and out of hours support. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and there was increasingly less reliance on the use of agency staff.

People’s views were sought as part of the quality assurance process. A range of quality audits assessed the standard of care provided. Accidents and incidents were monitored to make sure the appropriate action had been taken to prevent them re-occurring. The registered manager was aware of the challenges of developing the service and sustaining improvements.

Support plans were well written although some documents in the care records were out of date or needed updating. The provider told us they would look at the recording of information about restrictions to make it more robust. The care we saw being provided was in line with people's care plans. The provider was working on ways to increase the activities available to people. Staff felt well supported and trained. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns and felt able to do so. Audits were completed to assess service quality. Learning took place following complaints, whistleblowing and incidents. The provider told us they planned to get feedback from relatives in the future and said they would ensure regular meetings also took place with people using the service.