Archived: Creative Support - Clover Court & Warden Road

Clover Court & Warden Road provides supported living to people with learning disabilities and autism at three sites. Clover Court, Warden Road and Melody Road which are based in the London boroughs of Barnet, Camden and Wandsworth.

Not everyone using the service receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection seven people were receiving a personal care service.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service

People told us people they were happy with the care and support they received because they felt safe and all their needs were met by kind and caring staff.

People praised the managers of the service and agreed that they were approachable, knowledgeable, fair and did their job well. The staff team worked well together and supported the registered manager.

The staff team was committed to providing a high-quality service and keeping people safe. They had undertaken training so that they were skilled and knowledgeable to effectively meet people’s needs. Staff understood their responsibilities to report any concerns.

Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible and respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff knew people well. Staff managed the risks to people’s health and welfare.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were given choices about the way in which they were cared for. Staff listened to them and knew their needs well. Care plans contained information about each person’s individual support needs and preferences in relation to their care and we found evidence of good outcomes for people. When people did not have the capacity to make their own decisions, staff maximised their involvement and made decisions in their best interests, in accordance with legislation.

Recruitment practices were safe and relevant checks had been completed before staff worked at the service.

.

People told us staff were able to meet their needs and were respectful of their individual preferences.

People received care and support from a small group of staff, which provided consistency.

The managers of the service actively sought the views of people and their relatives about the running of the service and they dealt promptly with any concerns that people raised.

The provider had systems in place to monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.

More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection

At the last inspection we rated this service Good. The report was published on 24 February 2017.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor this service.

The service had 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.

People’s needs were assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support people required. People and their families said they were involved in their care planning and were happy to express their views or raise concerns. When people’s needs changed, this was quickly identified and prompt, appropriate action was taken to ensure people’s well-being was protected. People had a copy of their care plan in their home.

People experienced good quality care and support. They were supported to live safe, fulfilled and meaningful lives in the way they wanted to.

People were supported with healthy eating and to maintain a healthy weight, with specialist diets when required. People who needed assistance with meal preparation were supported and encouraged to make choices about what they ate and drank. The support staff we spoke with demonstrated an excellent knowledge of people’s care needs, significant people and events in their lives, and their daily routines and preferences. They also understood the provider’s safeguarding procedures and could explain how they would protect people if they had any concerns

Staff told us they really enjoyed working in the service and spoke positively about the culture and management of the service. Staff told us that they were encouraged to openly discuss any issues. Staff said they enjoyed their jobs and described management as supportive. Staff confirmed they were able to raise issues and make suggestions about the way the service was provided.

The service was safe and there were appropriate safeguards in place to help protect the people who lived there. People were able to make choices about the way in which they were cared for. Staff listened to them and knew their needs well. Staff had the training and support they needed.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practices were safe and relevant checks had been completed before staff worked at the home. People’s medicines were managed appropriately so they received them safely.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that as far as possible people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Appropriate mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been undertaken by relevant professionals. This ensured that the decision was taken in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005, DoLS and associated Codes of Practice.

People participated in a range of different social activities and were supported to access the local community. They also participated in shopping for their own needs, and some people had recently been on holiday together with staff support.

The registered manager and staff ensured everyone was supported to maintain good health. They took a very proactive approach to ensuring people's complex health needs were always met, and consistently ensured that when people needed specialist input from health care professionals they got it.

Staff were extremely caring and always ensured they treated people with dignity and respect. They had an excellent understanding of the care and support needs of every person living in the service. People had developed very positive relationships with staff and the atmosphere was friendly and relaxed.

Staff were well supported with training, supervision and appraisal which helped them to ensure they provided very effective care for people.

People and those important to them, such as their relatives or professionals were asked for feedback about the quality of the service.

People knew how to make a complaint and correct procedures were in place.

Person centred care was fundamental to the service and staff made sure people were at the centre of their practice. Care plans focused on the whole person, and assessments and plans were regularly updated.

People's individual preferences, needs and choices were always taken into account by the caring and compassionate staff.

The service was well led. There was a clear set of values in place which all of the staff put into practice. The registered manager and service director regularly completed very robust quality assurance checks, to make sure the high standards of care were maintained. There was an open culture and staff said they felt well motivated and valued by all of the managers.