The inspection took place on the 16 January 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a supported living service. We wanted to be sure that someone would be in to speak with us.

This service provides care and support to people living in a supported living setting, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

L'Arche Bognor Regis is registered to provide personal care to people living with a learning disability and other complex needs, including autism. At the time of our inspection, the service was supporting five people. The provider offers care and support to people who require help with day-to-day routines including personal care, meal preparation, housework, accessing the community and companionship.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

The service was last inspected on the 6 September 2016, where we found the provider was in breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because we identified the provider did not always assess the risks to the health and safety of people receiving care and did not do all that is reasonable to mitigate such risks. There was no robust system and processes to assess, monitor and mitigate risks or, monitor and improve the quality and safety. The service received an overall rating of 'Requires Improvement', and after our inspection the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to these breaches.

Staff had a firm understanding of how to keep people safe and there were appropriate arrangements in place to manage risks. People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it.

Quality assurance audits completed by the registered manager and provider were embedded to ensure a good level of quality was maintained. We saw audit activity for areas such as accidents and incidents, care planning and training.

People were supported to receive their medicines safely. The provider had arrangements in place for the safe administration of medicines. People were supported to get their medicine safely when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health care services.

Staff considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. 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 supported at mealtimes to access food and drink of their choice. Some people’s food preparation at mealtimes was supported by staff or themselves, staff ensured meals were accessible to people.

People’s individual needs were assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support they required. People were consulted about their care to ensure wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment when required.

People and relatives felt staff were kind and caring. Staff spoke warmly about the people they supported and provided care for. Staff were able to detail people's needs and how they gave assurance when providing care.

Staff felt supported by management to undertake their roles. Staff were g

The inspection took place on 6 September 2016 and was announced.

L’Arche Bognor Regis is registered to provide personal care to people living with a learning disability and other complex needs, including autism and mental health. The provider offers care and support to people who require help with day-to-day routines including personal care, meal preparation, housework, accessing the community and companionship. People have their own service user/tenancy agreements. At the time of our inspection, the service was supporting two people in their own flats and three people in shared accommodation in West Sussex.

There was no registered manager in place at the time of the inspection. However, a manager had been appointed in May 2016 and had begun the process of applying for registration. 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.

The management of the service was inconsistent and lacked continuity. There were ineffective systems or processes in the service to ensure that the services provided were safe, effective or well led.

Risks to people’s health, safety and well-being had not always been mitigated and staff had not followed risk management strategies set out in people’s care plans.

Staff demonstrated that they understood their responsibilities to support people with making decisions about their care, but the provider needed to improve their record keeping in demonstrating that people's rights were being upheld.

People said they felt safe with the staff. There were policies and procedures regarding the safeguarding of adults. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from the risk of abuse.

There was a reliable service from regular staff. There were sufficient numbers of suitably experienced staff employed to meet people’s individual needs. Thorough recruitment processes were in place for newly appointed staff to check they were suitable to work with people who may be at risk.

There was a policy and procedure in place with regard to medicine administration and this was understood by staff. People were supported to take their medicines when they needed them.

People being supported each had a care plan, which gave guidance to staff on how support should be given.

There was suitable training, support and induction for staff so they could support people effectively. Staff told us they received regular training and that they had a good induction before they started to provide support to people.

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and associated legislation. Staff knew what action to take if they thought a person lacked capacity to consent.

Staff monitored people’s health and they supported people to access healthcare professionals when needed.

Staff were kind and caring. People were able to express their views and said they were encouraged to be independent as possible. They confirmed they were treated with dignity and respect and said their needs were regularly reviewed. A person told us, they were contacted on a regular basis to ensure that their current up to date needs were being met. A complaints procedure was in place that described how concerns should be raised.

We found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

We visited the domiciliary agency and looked at the care and welfare of people who used the service. The provider is registered with the commission to provide the regulated activity 'personal care'. This is taken to mean it provides assistance for people who may need help eating, drinking or maintaining personal hygiene, for example. Only one person was in need of this support at a low level however they all received assistance with everyday tasks, to make decisions and to take part in local community activities. The house they lived in was a shared tenancy and did not form part of our inspection.

We looked at care records, files and audits and spoke with the registered manager and two staff. We looked at feedback from questionnaires. We also visited and spoke with one person who was at home having received their permission to do so.

One person said “I love living in my own home”. They told us they liked living with others and were very happy with the people who supported them.

People using the service told us they felt safe with staff. People were happy with the skill and experience of staff. One person told us "I like the way my key worker supports me”.

We saw that the provider had quality checks in place and that the registered manager regularly sought the views of people to ensure they were satisfied with the service.

We were not able to speak with people who had care provided by L'Arche as we had made an unannounced visit to the offices. The provider is registered with the commission to provide the regulated activity 'personal care'. This is taken to mean it provides assistance for people who need help eating,drinking or maintaining personal hygeine, for example. The people who received support from L'Arche Bognor were not, generally, in need of this level of support but did receive assistance with everyday tasks, to make decisions and to take part in local community activities. The house they lived in was a shared tenancy and did not form part of our inspection.

We looked at the review forms that the people using the service had filled in prior to their review meeting. We saw that these allowed people to give their opinion and views on many aspects of their lives and to suggest other things they might like to do. The comments made by people were positive and they clearly enjoyed living as part of the community.

We spoke with representatives of the local authority who fund the personal care provision. They told us that the care and supported provided was 'outstanding' and that they had no concerns about the welfare of any of the people they funded care for.

We also spoke with a minister from a local church with whom one person was actively involved. They told us that they thought the community was a "wonderful thing where everyone was valued and respected".