PILS

Updated 3 October 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 comprehensive inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

The office visit took place on 5 September 2017 and was announced. The provider was given notice that we were coming so they could arrange to be there.

Before our inspection visit we asked the provider to send to us a Provider’s Information Return (PIR). This document allows the provider to give us key information about the service, what it does well and what improvements they plan to make. We were able to review the information during our inspection. We found the information contained in the PIR was an accurate assessment of the service.

Prior to the office visit we reviewed the information we held about the service. We looked at the statutory notifications the service had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. We contacted the local authority commissioners to find out their views of the service provided. Commissioners are people who contract care and support services paid for by the local authority. They had no concerns about the service.

We also sent surveys to people who used the service, relatives, staff, and community professionals involved with the service. Surveys were returned from 11 staff and six professionals.

The provider sent a list of people who we could contact by phone to ask them their views of the service. Due to people’s complex needs we were not able to speak directly with most people who used PILS, but we were able to speak with relatives to find out their views of the service. From the 12 names provided we spoke with eight people, (seven relatives and one person who used the service). We used this information to help make a judgement about the service.

During the office visit we spoke with the manager, two support co-ordinators, a senior support worker and four support staff. We reviewed three people’s care records to see how their care and support was planned and delivered. We looked at three staff recruitment files, staff training records, records of complaints, and records associated with the provider's quality checking systems.

Updated 3 October 2017

Promoting Independent Living Services (PILS) provides care and support to people with learning disabilities living in their own home. Some people who used the service required support 24 hours a day while other people received support at pre-arranged times. At the time of our visit the agency supported 46 people. Eight people required full support with personal care, others’ required prompting to remind them to complete personal care routines. The provider referred to where people lived as supported 'tenancies'.

The information in this report relates to the service provided from 7 Dover Street, Coventry and not the location, 1a Lamb Street, Coventry as stated on the front of this report. The provider had recently moved to the new premises and the registration process to add the new location had not been completed at the time of this inspection. The change of address had not affected the service provided by PILS.

At the last inspection in July 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The office visit took place 5 September 2017 and was announced. We told the provider before the visit we were coming so they could arrange to be there and arrange for staff to be available to talk with us about the service.

A requirement of the provider’s registration is that they have a registered manager. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. Since the last inspection the registered manager had left the service, another manager had been appointed in May 2017, and had applied to register with us.

People continued to receive care which protected them from avoidable harm and abuse. Staff understood people’s needs and knew how to protect them from the risk of abuse. Risks to people’s safety were identified and assessments were in place to manage identified risks. Where people required support to take prescribed medicines, staff had received training to assist people safely.

There were enough experienced staff to meet the needs of people who used the service. People were supported by staff who had the skills and training to meet their needs. The manager and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were involved in making every day decisions and choices about how they wanted to live their lives.

People were visited by a team of regular staff that they knew and who they said were kind and caring. Recruitment checks were completed on new staff to ensure they were suitable to support people who used the service.

The service remained responsive to people’s needs and wishes. People were provided with care and support which was individual to them. Managers and staff had a positive approach to risk taking and people were able to live their lives in the way they chose. Staff respected people's privacy and dignity and promoted their independence. Relatives and people said the support they received helped people who used the service live independently in their own homes.

Support plans were detailed and personalised. Plans provided guidance for staff to follow so they were able to support each person in the way they preferred. Where required, people were supported to have sufficient to eat and drink and their health needs were regularly monitored. People’s care and support needs were kept under review and staff responded when there were changes in these needs.

The service continued to be well led. Staff said they received good support from all the management team and that senior staff were always available to give advice. Management and staff told us there was good team work and that all staff worked well together. There continued to be effective and responsive processes for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service provided.