We carried out a review of the data available to us about YourLife (Lancaster) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about YourLife (Lancaster), you can give feedback on this service.
This service provides care and support to people living in specialist 'extra care' housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought, and is the occupant’s own home. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people's personal care and support service.
People using the service lived in ordinary flats in a purpose built assisted or tailored care living development.
Not everyone using YourLife (Lancaster) receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
The service has recently employed a manager who is not yet registered with the CQC. 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 we spoke with told us they felt safe . We found people were protected from risks associated with their care because the registered provider had completed risk assessments. These provided updated guidance for staff to keep people safe.
We looked at how people were protected from bullying, harassment, avoidable harm and abuse. Systems were used to reduce people being at risk of harm and potential abuse. Staff had received up to date safeguarding training and understood the provider's safeguarding adult’s procedures.
We found medicines management to be safe within the service. Monthly audits were being completed to ensure the safe management of medicines administration. We found protocols for ‘as and when required’ medicines were in place where needed.
We found recruitment to be safe at the service. We looked at how the service was staffed. We did this to make sure there were enough staff on duty at all times to support people in their care. We found that there were enough staff to meet the needs of people who used the service.
We found people are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.
We saw evidence people's care and support was delivered in line with legislation and evidence based guidance. We found the service was pro-active in supporting people to have sufficient nutrition and hydration. Care plans showed where appropriate the service had made referrals to health care professionals such as the community nursing team and GP's.
We received consistent positive feedback about care provided at YourLife (Lancaster) from people who used the service. People we spoke with told us, “The staff are friends first and foremost.”
People's beliefs, likes and wishes were recorded within care records and guidance in these records reflected what staff and people told us about their preferences. Each record contained a comprehensive history of each person. This supported staff in developing positive and meaningful relationships with people.
We saw care records were written in a person centred way and we observed staff followed the guidance in care records. People had access to external healthcare professionals to maintain their wellbeing.
The service had lots of activities available within the communal areas that people could get involved with if they wanted to. People told us they were encouraged to raise any concerns or complaints. The service had a complaints procedure.
We found there was no registered manager at the service. We spoke with the area manager about this and were informed that a manager has been employed and they were awaiting pre-employment checks before the manager could commence employment and register.
We saw evidence of a staff meetings being held regularly. These were well attended by staff. The meetings were used to share best practice and facilitate communication.
The management and staff team have been open and transparent in getting us the information and have worked well with the inspection team.