About the service: Creative Support – Dudley Service provides care and support to people living in a number of ‘supported living’ settings, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. The service was providing personal care to 29 younger and older people at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were supported by staff who were aware of the risks to them and how to keep them safe from harm. Where safeguarding concerns had been raised, they had been responded to and acted on appropriately. Individual lessons where learnt when accidents and incidents took place, and work was underway to analyse the information collected for any lessons to be learnt.

Staff felt well trained and supported in their role. People were happy with the care they received and felt it met their needs. Staff practice was regularly observed to ensure people were supported safely and effectively and in line with their care needs.

Staff had received training that was appropriate to them in their role and supported them in providing care in the way people wanted.

Staff were aware of people’s health needs and liaised with other health care professionals to support their wellbeing. People were supported where appropriate at mealtimes.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were well cared for by staff who treated them with dignity and respect and encouraged them to maintain their independence. People were supported to be involved in decisions regarding their care. People received care and support based on their individual assessment, needs and preferences.

People were confident that if they raised a concern, it would be dealt with appropriately. Where complaints had been raised, they had been responded to and acted on appropriately.

People and staff were complimentary of the service and considered it to be well led. People were asked for feedback on their experience of the service through surveys, meetings and telephone calls. Staff felt supported and listened to and able to contribute to the running of the service. A number of quality audits were in place and the registered manager had plans in place to drive improvement in the service.

Relatives told us they would recommend the service, one relative told us, “I would recommend them because I feel good care is hard to come by and they do provide good care”.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated ‘Good’ (published 5 October 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection.

Follow up: We will monitor all intelligence received about the service to ensure the next planned inspection is scheduled accordingly.

The inspection took place on 24 August 2016 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in. At our last inspection on the 11 November 2013 the provider was compliant with the regulations inspected.

Creative Support – Dudley Services is registered to provide personal care services to adults in their own homes or a supported living environment. People the service supported had a range of needs including physical disability and learning disability. On the day of the inspection 31 people were receiving support. There was a registered manager in post. 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 were safe within the service. Care staff received the appropriate training and guidance to know what action to take to keep people safe from harm. We found that people received their medicines as it was prescribed.

Care staff received supervision and training to ensure they had the appropriate skills and knowledge to support people. The requirements under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were being adhered to and staff received the appropriate training to ensure people’s human rights were not restricted. People were supported with their meals as required and they were able to access health care as needed.

People were able to make decisions on the support they received from care staff. People were involved in the reviewing process so where there were changes to how they were supported they were an integral part of the process. People’s dignity, privacy and independence was respected.

We found that people’s support needs were appropriately assessed and a support plan put in place which people were involved in. People were able to raise concerns they had by way of the provider’s complaints process. People were able to access an advocate service where needed.

The provider’s audits and checking process were not sufficiently effective in ensuring the quality of the service people received.

The provider ensured people were able to share their views on the support they received by way of completing questionnaires

We spoke with five people who used the service, two relatives, two social work professional’s, three support workers and the registered manager.

People we spoke with told us that they felt respected by staff and involved in their care. They told us that their wishes were respected, one person told us, “They let me have time to myself when I want it”. One relative commented that, “Care is focussed on the individual”.

We saw that care plans were person centred and comprehensive and people’s needs were individually assessed. One relative told us, “The care, both physical and mental is spot on”. Care was planned in a way that ensured people’s safety and welfare.

People we spoke with said they felt safe and would tell staff or the manager if they were unhappy or worried. We found that people who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse.

The staff we spoke with told us they had regular training opportunities, supervision and an annual appraisal. This meant that staff received appropriate professional development.

We saw that an effective system was in place for dealing with complaints. One external professional we spoke with told us, “Any issues I have bought forward have been dealt with effectively”. We saw that complaints were taken seriously and investigated.