We carried out a review of the data available to us about Lifeways Community Care (Sunderland North) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Lifeways Community Care (Sunderland North), you can give feedback on this service.
About the service
Church View is a ‘supported living’ service providing personal care to people with a learning disability and/or autism living in their own tenancies in bungalows and flats in ‘supported living’ settings. The service was supporting three people with personal care at the time of our inspection.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Support
¿ People were supported and encouraged to follow their goals and aspirations. They tried new things and learned new skills. People were encouraged to push themselves, balancing risks with increasing independence.
¿ People took pride in their homes; they had personalised them inside and out.
¿ People were supported to access health and social care support. They experienced some good health and wellbeing outcomes through working with external healthcare professionals.
¿ Staff supported people to take their medicines in their preferred way, and to have their medicines needs reviewed, in line with good practice guidance.
Right Care
¿ Staff were sufficiently skilled and experienced to meet people’s needs. They understood that people had very different levels of independence and helped them accordingly.
¿ People had made friends and saw their relatives regularly. They were protected from the risk of social isolation.
¿ Staff understood people’s communication styles and had a good rapport with them.
¿ Support plans and risk assessments reflected people’s needs. Support plans which set out people’s goals were not always updated in a timely fashion, although people did meet the goals they set for themselves.
¿ Staff were kind, patient and took a genuine interest in people. They respected people’s privacy and dignity.
¿ Staff worked well with other agencies to keep people safe. They had relevant training on safeguarding and how to report suspected abuse.
Right culture
¿ The ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff were in line with the key principles of guidance such as Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture. The manager was relatively new and was not always fully aware of some relevant best practice, but they were keen to develop and had made a range of improvements at the service. Staff felt well supported by the manager and could raise any issues. External professionals provided positive feedback regarding the manager’s approach.
¿ People and those important to them were involved in planning their care. Care plans were reviewed regularly.
¿ Staff knew people well and were responsive to their support needs.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection to assess that the service is applying the principles of Right support, Right care, Right culture. This was a planned inspection based on when the service first registered with us.
Follow up
We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
We found the following examples of good practice.
Staff followed good infection prevention and control (IPC) practices. Checks were completed when visitors accessed the service to minimise the risk of infection. The service was clean and this had been enhanced following the recent outbreak of COVID-19. Staff had access to good supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE). Staff had completed specific training about how to use this correctly. The provider regularly communicated with Public Health England (PHE) for guidance to deal with the outbreak. PHE recommended additional preventative measures, which the service had implemented.