Archived: Creative Support - Tameside Service (Learning Disability)

The inspection was undertaken by one inspector. This summary addresses five key questions: is the service safe; is the service effective; is the service caring; is the service responsive and is the service well led?

This summary is based on a visit to the office base of the service which is located at St Albans Avenue, Ashton-under-Lyne. There we met and spoke with both registered managers of the service. We also looked at some records. Following the visit to the office we were taken to one of the projects currently being supported by Creative Support at 121 Town Lane Denton. There we spoke with the project manager, four care staff and one person using the service. We also looked at some records.

The full report contains the evidence to support this summary.

Is the service safe?

The person who used the service who we asked said that they felt safe living at the property and with the care staff who supported them. They told us, 'I do feel very safe living here. The staff help me to feel safe'. Care staff told us that they had received training in safeguarding procedures and understood their responsibility to raise concerns where necessary. They also understood their responsibility to 'blow the whistle' if concerning or unsafe practices were witnessed by them or were not being addressed by their managers.

The project manager told us that most people using the service had been referred by the local authority commissioners of services. They told us when a tenancy was available they would receive a referral and a request to assess the person to make sure their individual assessed needs could be appropriately met at Town Lane by staff from Creative Support.

Staff told us that personal protective equipment (PPE) such as disposable gloves and aprons, were also available for them to use. The use of PPE helps to minimise the potential risk of cross infection.

Is the service effective?

Each person had a written care plan available to them in their own flat. This was confirmed by the person using the service that we spoke with. They told us that they were involved in discussions about their care plan and could say if they wanted to change anything.

All staff who we spoke with confirmed that there was a written care plan and care file available in the flat of each person using the service. One member of staff said that people's needs could change from day to day and that 'You still need to ask the person what they want each time you visit them'.

The service had effective quality monitoring systems. These would help to identify if the service needed to review or amend any of its practices.

Is the service caring?

Although we only spoke with one person using the service they were very positive about the attitude of the staff who visited them. Their comments included: 'I like living here. The staff are good with me, they know what I need. I like it when [male staff] helps me, he is good. We talk about my plan [care] and things'.

Staff told us the support from their line manager was good and was 'very supportive'. Staff also told us they knew it was an expectation of the service that people were treated with respect at all times and that their dignity should always be maintained.

Is the service responsive?

Staff we spoke with told us that they were confident that any complaint raised by a person using the service would be listened to, taken seriously and would be investigated. They also told us that the manager of the service was very responsive when they raised concerns that a care plan may no longer be working or may need modifying.

There was a range of quality monitoring systems in place. However at the time of this inspection the project manager had only been in post since May 2014 and was therefore still developing the system. We did see evidence that quality monitoring checks had been conducted for care records and health and safety checks on the individual premises of the service users.

Is the service well led?

There were clear lines of accountability within the service.

The service had two managers; both were registered with the Care Quality Commission.

There were a variety of systems in place to enable managers to monitor quality and identify risk. This helped ensure that people continued to receive a safe and effective service.

The managers reported any issues of concern, such as safeguarding concerns to the relevant authorities and did so in a timely manner.

Managers were described by staff as approachable and supportive.

We were invited to visit three people who lived together in one house (supported living) who were being supported and assisted by staff from Creative Support. We also had the opportunity to speak on the telephone with the relatives of people who use the services of Creative Support.

People who used the service had initial assessments, risk assessments and care plans put in place that identified their individual support requirements. This meant that Creative Support (Learning Disability) had information available about how to provide people with effective, safe and appropriate care and support that met their needs.

We saw that consent was obtained before any care or support was provided. Care plans were in place and were reviewed on a regular basis to make sure they continued to be relevant and appropriate. Relatives spoken with on the telephone confirmed that reviews of care plans took place. This showed people who used the service were involved in decisions related to their care.

One relative we spoke with told us, 'My [relative] has a consistent staff team supporting them and this works really well'.