LDC Supported Living

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

People’s needs were fully assessed. This was a continuous process that started at the initial assessment and was maintained throughout people’s support. Staff within LDC Supported Living, worked together and alongside other professionals to provide joined up support for people. This meant people’s diverse and changing needs were holistically met in a way that supported people to have excellent outcomes. Staff worked with people or relevant others to ensure the support delivered was consented to. Any areas of support where people were unable to consent was delivered in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act to be in people’s best interest and the least restrictive to provide positive outcomes and achievements for people.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People’s needs were assessed before moving into the service. People and those important to them were involved in people’s assessed needs and deciding on support plans as far as possible. Relatives all said they were involved in assessments. A relative said communication was good, “They do a pretty good job and keep us in the loop to make sure [loved one’s] needs are met…Very good at communicating.” People’s needs were assessed holistically with relevant support plans to ensure people received the right support. A relative told us staff met their loved one's communication needs. They said, “Staff will communicate verbally with my non-verbal relative and also use pictures and gesturing. [Loved one] understands verbal language and uses Makaton. Staff know how to use some Makaton.”

Staff were aware of people's assessed needs and understood that needs changed or varied for people. The deputy manager told us people's needs were continually assessed, relevant support was implemented and if things were not working well adjustments were quickly made. Support that worked well for people was shared widely across the team to ensure people received support that met their needs well.

Feedback from partners was very positive about how LDC Supported Living had successfully assessed needs and creatively supported people to meet those needs and worked towards their goals. One professional fed back on a questionnaire, ‘Overall extremely satisfied that staff at LDC have a good knowledge and understanding of [person’s] needs and how to support and enable [their] independence.’ Another professional shared, ‘LDC were identified as a provider that could meet [person’s] needs. Since working with them they have been very proactive…This has not been without issue and there have been wobbles but these have been managed well by LDC working with the rest of the community MDT.'

Assessments included detailed information about people’s support needs including health, psychological and social needs. They contained information about the strengths people had to do things for themselves and when they needed support. People’s well-being was continually assessed daily, and guidance clearly outlined how staff promoted people’s well-being. People’s communication needs were also clearly set out in their assessments and support plans. For example, chosen phrases used by people had a clear explanation that allowed staff to understand what was being communicated and how best to respond.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People experienced successful and smooth transitions due to determined and effective multi-disciplinary working that championed bespoke support for people. A relative told us, “It was [a] very detailed transition plan for [loved one] because of [their] special needs and that was done in a very informed way.” Another relative said, “Staff were gradually introduced as part of the transition plan, so my [loved one] could get used to them before the move.” People also successfully tolerated and received care from other health services because of the support they received from LDC Supported Living. A relative told us they felt their loved ones health had improved as LDC Supported Living had been “very creative” in accessing support from other services. They said, “they take [loved one] to the dentist now which was difficult before… they are well supported and prepared.”

Staff proudly told us they had meticulously assessed and planned people’s transition which successfully supported people to transition with LDC Supported Living. People’s individual needs and circumstances were considered, for example, gradual exposure and increases in proximity to people or modes of transport. Staff told us people’s personalities and strengths were also considered when planning significant moves. Staff trialled ways to reduce anxiety and stress such as the presence of people or objects that helped to put people at ease. Continuity of staff was maintained with a small team to further reassure people. Staff also gave examples of how they had compassionately supported people to access services which improved people’s physical health or accessed the community for their well-being.

There was a strong ethos of multi-disciplinary team working to ensure people were supported fully and effectively. Feedback from partners highlighted LDC Supported Living had provided a high level of engagement and fantastic support which had enabled smooth transitions. One professional shared their feedback of working with LDC Supported Living. It read, ‘As a provider they took the initiative, identifying a staff team and making sure that all relevant information was passed to them. They worked with [person’s] family to build confidence and encouraging them to be part of the process. Before [person] moved, [LDC Supported Living] arranged for training and orientation session, involving members of the community team, to take place so that staff could learn more about what [person’s] needs are, but took this much further seeing [person] as an individual and someone with [their] own unique skills, likes wants and needs. Staff were actively engaged with this process and were encouraged to ask questions and to seek answers to help them understand how best to support [person]. [Person’s] progress since indicates that they have been able to use this learning and put it into practice to support [them]… They very much have a can-do attitude.’ Another professional fed back, ‘From the beginning, your dedication to providing the best care possible to [person] was clear…Thank you to all of the staff working with [person] in making [their] transition such a smooth one.'

LDC Supported Living processes had people at the heart of how staff, teams and services worked together to provide effective support. There were several examples of where people had been successfully supported due to truly personalised approaches to support transitions into or between services. This resulted in positive outcomes in relation to people’s health, psychological, well-being and social needs that exceeded expectations of those involved in the person’s life. For example, people were supported to overcome anxieties resulting in personal care, healthcare and social needs being met. For one person this was enabled by using their idol in a social story about their medical appointment. For another person, staff slowly increased their tolerance for social settings and interactions, initially the person only sustained short periods of time but now could stay for the full duration. There were pictures showing the person looking happy at events. Without the knowledge LDC Supported Living acquired and the support they delivered, transitioning people with complex needs could not be successfully achieved.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People were supported to make informed choices and encouraged to make decisions they were able to. We saw people were asked for their consent. For example, when we visited people in their homes staff asked people if it was okay. Staff only allowed us access to people’s home once they had clearly agreed. Wherever people lacked capacity to make decisions for themselves, relatives said they were fully involved in decision making and were consulted as appropriate.

Staff understood people were at the centre of their care and the importance of them consenting to all daily activities. They described people’s routines and daily lives as revolving around people’s consent and choices. A staff member said, “fortunate to work with [person] in person-centred way, support daily activities…and in supporting them we promote their independence to make their choices.” Leaders told us people benefitted from staff advocating on their behalf to improve their outcomes where appropriate. For example, staff challenged other professionals to ensure better health equality and outcomes for people. Staff considered what treatment the person would want, weighed up any negative impact and positive impact for people and ultimately advocated in the person’s best interest.

There were systems and processes in place to assess people’s capacity to make decisions for themselves. Care plans contained detailed information about people’s wishes and preferences. Mental Capacity Assessments were undertaken according to best practice and people received information about care and treatment in a way they could understand. Mental Capacity Assessments were undertaken for a range of decisions for each person for example around personal care or medical treatment. Each assessment was person-centred and followed best practice. There were details in people’s care plans which highlighted who had power of attorney to make decisions on behalf of the individual. Where people were unable to make decisions for themselves, decisions were made in their best interest in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. Restrictions for people were reviewed to ensure they were the least restrictive and necessary with relevant others and professionals. Leaders monitored the number of times restraint was used and learnt from incidents where restraint had been used. Plans had been successfully implemented to reduce restrictive intervention with success, this helped to protect people’s rights.