Richardson Duston Limited

“This was a responsive assessment, following an incident of potential avoidable harm.”

“ ”

“The provider had systems in place to learn from events and had implemented actions, however, further development was required to explore all avenues available to improve outcomes of people’s support on all occasions.”

“ ”

“The provider had systems to monitor and improve the service; however, staff practice did not always match the provider’s policies in areas such as medicines management, maintaining privacy and dignity and infection control.”

“ ”

“The provider employed a multi-disciplinary team (MDT) which consisted of consultants from differing professions, which enabled the people using the service to access specialist support and care promptly. The team worked together effectively to improve outcomes for people using the service.”

“ ”

“The provider supported people to maintain and develop their independence, treated people as individuals, and people who could take part verbally were involved in their assessment, development and formulation of their care. There was some room for improvement to adapt processes, such as helping people understand their rights, for people with different communication needs.”

“ ”

“Staff and leaders were knowledgeable about their roles, accountability, responsibility and best practice. Staff felt supported and there were opportunities for staff to progress and be upskilled.”

“ ”

“We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgments about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found that the provider was supporting people to the standards of this guidance. ”