This inspection took place on 10 and 12 July 2018 and was announced.

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.

At the time of the inspection, the service supported 18 people.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 who were supported by the service felt safe. Staff had a clear understanding on how to safeguard people and protect their health and well-being. People received their medicines as prescribed. There were systems in place to manage safe administration and storage of medicines.

The service had robust recruitment procedures and conducted background checks to ensure staff were suitable for their roles.

People had a range of individualised risk assessments in place to keep them safe and to help them maintain their independence. Where risks to people had been identified, risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. Staff were aware of people’s needs and followed guidance to keep them safe.

Staff received adequate training and support to carry out their roles effectively. People felt supported by competent staff that benefitted from regular supervision (one to one meetings with their line manager) and team meetings to help them meet the needs of the people they cared for.

The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and applied its principles in their work. Where people were thought to lack capacity to make certain decisions, assessments had been completed in line with the principles of MCA. Staff were knowledgeable about the rights of people to make their own choices. This was reflected in the way the care plans were written and the way in which staff supported and encouraged people to make decisions when delivering care and support.

People’s nutritional needs were met. People were given choices and were supported to have their meals when they needed them. Staff treated people with kindness, compassion and respect and promoted people’s independence and right to privacy. People received care that was personalised to meet their needs.

People were supported to maintain their health and were referred for specialist advice as required. There were good systems in place to allow safe transitioning between services.

Staff knew the people they cared for and what was important to them. Staff appreciated people’s life histories and understood how these could influence the way people wanted to be cared for. Staff supported and encouraged people to engage with a variety of social activities of their choice in the community. People were supported to work.

The service looked for ways to continually improve the quality of the service. Feedback was sought from people and their relatives and used to improve the care. People knew how to make a complaint and complaints were managed in accordance with the provider’s complaints policy.

Leadership within the service was open, transparent and promoted strong organisational values. This resulted in a caring culture that put people using the service at its centre. People, their relatives and staff were complimentary about the management team and how the service was run.

The registered manager informed us of all notifiable incidents. Staff spoke positively about the management support and leadership they received from the management team.

We inspected North Cherwell Supported Living Scheme on 28 and 29 September 2016. The service worked from an office in Banbury and provided personal care and support for people some of whom had learning or physical disabilities who live in their own homes in and around Banbury. At the time of the inspection there were 11people using the service.

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.

Staff told us they felt supported, however not all staff had received refresher training and supervision. Despite this, staff were knowledgeable and skilled to carry out their roles. People and their relatives told us staff always came when they were meant to. The service had robust recruitment procedures and conducted background checks to ensure staff were suitable for their roles. The service had staff vacancies which were often covered by regular staff working additional shifts. This had a negative impact on staff wellbeing, however, did not affect people’s safety.

The registered manager spent one day a week at the service. The registered manager told us they were going to review the time they spent at this service. The registered manager had identified recruitment as a big challenge. The provider were doing all they can to improve recruitment.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe using the service. Staff had a clear understanding on how to safeguard people and protect their health and well-being. People received their medicine as prescribed. There were systems in place to manage safe administration and storage of medicines. People had a range of individualised risk assessments in place to keep them safe and to help them maintain their independence. Staff were aware of people’s needs and followed guidance to keep them safe.

The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and applied its principles in their work. Where people were thought to lack capacity to make certain decisions, assessments had been completed in line with the principles of MCA.

People’s nutritional needs were met and people were supported to have a balanced diet. People were given choices and options. Staff treated people with kindness, compassion and respect and promoted people’s independence and right to privacy. People received good quality care that was personalised to meet their needs. People were supported to maintain their health and were referred for specialist advice as required.

Staff supported and encouraged people to engage with a variety of activities and entertainments that were meaningful to them. Activities were structured to people's interests and people chose what activities they wanted to do.

Feedback was sought from people and their relatives and used to improve the care. People knew how to make a complaint and complaints were managed in accordance with the provider’s complaints policy.

Leadership within the service was open and transparent at all levels. The provider had quality assurance systems in place. The provider had systems to enable people to provide feedback on the care they received. The registered manager informed us of all notifiable incidents. Staff spoke positively about the management support and leadership they received from the registered manager.

We identified one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activity) Regulation 2014. You can see what action we have required the provider to take at the end of this report.

We visited the offices of the service which is above a day centre and we were able to talk with people who used the service at the day centre. People told us that they were involved in the way the service was provided. One person told us " they ask me what I want to do at the start of the week". People told us that they liked the service and that they were well cared for and felt safe. One person said "I like the people who take care of me they are very kind". Two people we spoke with were on the selection panel for recruitment. We looked at person centred care plans for four people which demonstrated that people were being involved in the design of their care and that in most cases they signed to say they agreed with the plan. The service was starting to pilot a weekly review of people's activity plans in order to keep track of people's changing needs. People who used the service had a key worker specially assigned to them who worked on a one to one basis to check that they were meeting people's needs. One person told us "my key worker and I are talking about where I should go on my holiday". People told us they valued the fact that they were assisted to take an active part in their daily lives and access the community safely.