This inspection was announced and took place on 14 and 15 July 2016. It was carried out by one inspector. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. This was to ensure the manager (or a suitable deputy) would be available to meet us at the provider’s office and also to make arrangements for us to meet with some of the people who used the service.

Sense Community Services and Supported Living (South West) supports deafblind people who are dual or single sensory impaired with additional physical or learning disabilities. The location headquarters is at Providence Court. The provider is Sense, a national charity organisation for people who are deafblind. The term 'deafblind' covers a wide range of people, some of whom may or may not be totally deaf and blind.

The service is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) for the provision of personal care in people’s own homes. This includes assistance or prompting with washing, toileting, dressing, eating and drinking. At the time of the inspection the service supported nine people under a ‘supported living’ arrangement in five single and shared occupancy houses in Exeter, Poole and Havant. The service was responsible solely for the provision of people’s support services and not for the provision of their accommodation. This meant people had individual tenancy agreements and their personal care was provided under a separate contractual arrangement. In addition, the 'intervenor' service provided specialist one to one support to nine adults, communication support worker services supported one adult and the day service community support worker supported one adult. The role of the intervenor is to help the deafblind person interact and communicate with the outside world. These people lived in a variety of settings, including with families, in an adult placement and in a residential home. The service also provided other forms of social care support that are not included within CQC’s registration requirements for a supported living service. In addition to personal care support, the service assisted people with their housekeeping, shopping, social and employment activities, attending appointments and other independent living skills. Providence Court provided a day service and was the home of Café 55, run by deafblind and disabled volunteers and open to the general public.

At the time of the inspection a management restructure was underway. The intervenor service was managed by a person who was registered with the Care Quality Commission as the registered manager for the service. Two new managers were managing the supported living services and in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission. The previous registered manager for the supported living services was now, ‘operations manager’ for the region. 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 really enabled people to live meaningful and fulfilling lives; working in partnership with them to identify and achieve their personal goals. They were available to support people with personal care when needed, but the focus was on providing practical support while promoting people’s independence. This boosted people’s confidence and self-esteem and they told us how proud they felt when they achieved their goals.

People engaged in a wide range of activities of their choosing. The service assisted people with work placements, holidays, budgeting, safety, family contact, social networks and clubs. Recently people had created a play with a drama therapist, and performed it at a local theatre. Another person had helped to raise awareness about Sense by making a video about the intervenor service and

A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence that support our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People had been supported in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment at the location had been well maintained and serviced regularly. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people receiving the service and a member of the management team was available on call in case of emergencies. People using the service were encouraged to be responsible for their own safety, for example through managing their own medication. Most of the activities took place outside the location in the community and we saw on the files that people had individual risk assessments in place regarding their support needs in the community.

The staff, called intervenors, were well supported, receiving regular supervision and annual performance reviews. They also benefited from an intensive induction training programme when they commenced working for Sense. This was augmented by regular on-going training which was delivered either through training sessions or through e-learning. Staff were also encouraged to gain additional qualifications such as learning British Sign Language.

Is the service effective?

The purpose of the service was to enable people who received services to access mainstream community activities. An example of the effectiveness of this was that for the first two hours of our inspection there was nobody in the location. Everyone was out in the community with their intervenor's support. Two people returned to the location for lunch. After lunch one person left with their intervenor to attend sports practice and the second person remained to receive personal support. In the late afternoon a third person came in after a day's activities with their intervenor. All the other people receiving services did not access the location on that day, being collected and returned directly to their homes. One person told us that they chose what they wanted to do each day while another person said that they preferred to have a regular routine. They explained, using signs, what activities they did each day.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive intervenors. The manager explained that staff were called intervenors as they "intervened" between the person and the wider community, acting as interpreters and safety monitors. People got to know their team of intervenors very well and in turn the intervenors knew their people well. The management tried hard to "match" intervenors to people who used the service. Linking people with similar interests. For example one person told us that they liked walking and it was important that their intervenor shared this pleasure as they would be doing a lot of walks.

Over lunch we observed the interactions between people and the intervenors. We saw that there was mutual respect and gentle teasing of each other. For example one person was teasing their intervenor about using incorrect signs.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs were carefully assessed and the files confirmed that their preferences, interests and aspirations had been recorded and the support and activities that they participated in reflected this. Each person took part in an annual review of their service. A report was written that described what they had been doing over the year. People participated in their reviews by preparing photographs of the activities that they had been involved in over the year. People chose who to invite to their reviews. At the review people discussed what their future aspirations were. We asked to see the minutes of the reviews and these were shown to us.

The organisation also carried out surveys of how people felt about the services they received.

Is the service well-led?

On our arrival at the location the manager was out supporting a person. They returned at lunch time. The other manager was part time and not due in work until lunch. However their line manager, from Bristol, was on the premises. When we spoke with the managers it was clear that they know the people who use the service very well indeed. They explained that they needed to as they would step into provide support in the event of an intervenor being absent. We were only able to speak with one intervenor, but it was clear that they had a good understanding of their role and the purpose of the service. They told us that they felt well supported by management. Both people that we spoke with also clearly indicated their appreciation of the service they received. One person told us that they had left another day-service in order to maximise their time at Sense.

Sense Intervenor Outreach service is a community based service which provides care and support for people with sensory loss and learning disabilities. We talked with four people who used the service, four staff, and the manager. We looked at the care records of four people receiving a service and the records of four staff.

There were twelve people receiving support services at the time of our inspection. People appeared comfortable whether in the providers central office activity room facilities or out in the community enjoying their daily routines. We saw that staff had a good knowledge of the needs of the people they supported. Staff were observed to address people by their preferred names and were polite and respectful at all times. They checked that people were happy to do things such as assisting with their chosen activities or personal care before supporting them.

We saw that people were safe when receiving the service and their care and welfare were managed in accordance with their care plans. Staff were recruited in line with the providers’ policies and were knowledgeable about the needs of people and the level of independence they had. Staff were appropriately skilled and received induction training and support.

Equipment provided was designed to support the services people received and was maintained and checked regularly. There were appropriate systems in place to routinely monitor the records related to the running of the service as well as those about the support needs of people receiving services.

We (the Care Quality Commission) carried out an unannounced inspection to Sense Intervenor Outreach services by visiting the headquarters at Providence Court on 15 May 2012. The location includes a meeting and activities room, computer services, sensory and massage treatment rooms as well as Café 55, where people can purchase meals, snacks and meet up with friends. This inspection focused on the intervenor services.

Care workers, known as intervenors, are staff who have the required skills to work with deafblind adults who are dual or single sensory impaired with additional physical or learning disabilities. Intervenors support individuals to become independent in daily living skills at their own pace and in a way most appropriate to their needs.

We met four people who used the service, spoke to the registered manager and four intervenors about the services provided. Each intervenor worked with a few individuals and helped to support them to make choices and decisions about their day to day lives. Most people who used the service lived in their own homes but some people we met lived in residential care settings. The intervenor service helped to support people to access a range of activities and experiences within the community. We heard how intervenors used a range of communication methods to meet people’s needs. These included British Sign Language (BSL), photographs, Makaton and Widget symbols as well as objects of reference.

One person we met told us they love taking other people’s dog for a walk, doing a little bit of shopping, going into Exmouth as well as eating in a café. They said they used Café 55 when visiting Providence Court. We were told how another young person was supported by the intervenor service to gain their Duke of Edinburgh Gold award recently, this had included them doing voluntary work at Café 55. A relative we spoke with described the service as a ‘happy service’, they said the managers and staff were all very nice and approachable.

We found that the service was compliant with all the essential standards we inspected during our visit.