22 July 2014
During a routine inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which looks at the overall quality of the scheme.
This unannounced inspection took place on the 22 July 2014. At our previous inspection in April 2013 we found the provider was meeting the standards we looked at.
March Supported Living Scheme provides a scheme for up to 21 people with a learning disability. There were 14 people being supported by the scheme when we inspected. The scheme had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the scheme and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.
The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We found that people who used the service had their capacity to make day-to-day decisions formally assessed. At the time of our inspection no one living at the scheme had needed to be lawfully deprived of their liberty.
People’s needs were assessed and this information was used when compiling each person’s care plan. This enabled staff to support people using the scheme in a consistent way.
Staff’s knowledge of safeguarding vulnerable adults (SoVA) procedures showed us people could be confident any concerns would be reported to the appropriate authorities.
People’s privacy and dignity was consistently respected by all staff. This was by always ensuring that staff had obtained valid consent from each person before any care or support was provided, including knocking on the person’s door.
The provider had a complaints procedure in place in an appropriate format and if required, people could be supported to raise a concern or complaint. The provider had not received any complaints since our previous inspection in 2013.
The provider had a robust recruitment process in place. Records we looked at confirmed staff were only employed after all essential safety checks had been satisfactorily completed.
The provider had arrangements and systems in place to assess the quality of scheme it provided. This included reviews of people’s care using information in an appropriate format.