Archived: Residential Support Services

Updated 2 February 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 9 January 2019 and was announced. We gave the service short notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure staff would be present in the office. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

At the time of this inspection, four people were receiving support and 23 staff were employed. These included support workers, team leaders, a registered manager, service manager and an assistant manager all of who undertook some care and support visits to people.

Prior to the inspection, we gathered information from several sources. We reviewed the information we held about the service, which included correspondence we had received, and notifications submitted to us by the service. A notification should be sent to CQC every time a significant incident has taken place. For example, where a person who uses the service experiences a serious injury.

We did not ask the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) this was because we had changed our inspection dates and so we had not requested the form to be completed .The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We contacted Sheffield local authority to obtain their views of the service. All the comments and feedback received were reviewed and used to assist and inform our inspection.

We telephoned and spoke at length with the relatives of two people who used the service, this helped us understand their experience of the service. We were unable to communicate with people who used the service. We were advised by relatives and staff that to speak or visit some people may also cause them anxiety. We visited the service’s office to see and speak with the registered manager and another seven staff employed by the provider including team leaders, assistant managers, support workers and the human resources manager.

We reviewed a range of records, which included care records for two people, four staff training, support and employment records and other records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 2 February 2019

Residential Support Services provides personal care to adults with Learning Disabilities. The service provides support and social interaction to enable people to become more independent in the community. The office is based in a converted school where day services are also provided. At the time of this inspection the service was supporting four people with personal care.

Our last inspection at Residential Support Services took place on 21 June 2016 when the service was rated Good overall.

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

Staff recruitment records were not robust and did not promote people’s safety.

There were a variety of methods available for the registered provider to assess and monitor the quality of the service; however, records of these checks were not being maintained. We found quality assurance processes were not effective in ensuring compliance with regulations and identifying areas requiring improvement and acting on them.

Staff were provided with supervision for development and support. The frequency and consistency of supervision needed some improvement.

Relatives spoke very positively about the support provided to their family member. They said their family member was safe and support workers were respectful and kind. Relatives told us the staff of Residential Support Services provided a consistent and reliable service that met their family member’s needs.

We found there were systems in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff we spoke with were able to explain the procedures to follow should an allegation of abuse be made.

Assessments identified risks to people, and management plans to reduce the risks were in place to ensure people's safety.

Appropriate arrangements were in place for the safe administration of medicines.

There were appropriate numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service.

Staff were provided with relevant training to ensure they had the skills needed to support people.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The registered provider’s policies and systems supported this practice. People had consented to receiving care and support from Residential Support Services.

Staff knew the person they were supporting well and had developed a positive relationship with them. In our conversations with staff they displayed compassion, consideration and respect for people.

Families of people supported told us they could talk to the support staff and the registered manager. They said they had regular contact with the registered manager and if they had any concerns or worries they were confident the registered manager and staff would listen to them and look at ways of resolving their issues.

We found breaches in two regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was a breach of Regulation 19, Fit and proper persons employed and a repeated breach of Regulation 17, Good governance.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.