United Response – 29 Mayfair Avenue

“We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements 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.”

“This inspection was conducted by a single adult social care inspector and was unannounced. We reviewed 16 quality statements including all those in relation to the key question, Is the well-led? For the other 4 key questions which we did not review all the quality statements associated with them. We used the ratings awarded at their last inspection to calculate the overall rating.”

“The service was rated good at their last inspection [published 13 June 2019].”

“We were prompted to inspect the service because of the age of their previous CQC inspection report which was now over 6 years old. In addition, we wanted to check they had improved how they operated their governance systems as we had recommended they do at their last inspection.”

“Based on the findings of this inspection the service remains rated good overall.”

“The service had made improvements to the way they operated their governance systems as recommended at their last CQC inspection.”

“The service now had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly.”

“The atmosphere in the care home was relaxed and calm. Feedback from managers and staff was positive.”

“People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.”

“People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Staff made sure people understood their care to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.”

“People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.”

“Managers and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Managers were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. People with protected characteristics felt supported. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers and staff worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas.”

“ ”