Guardian Supported Living Ltd

“This was a responsive inspection of two key questions triggered by our ongoing monitoring of the service.”

“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.”

“Staff understood and managed risks. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes. The service provided information that people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took feedback seriously and acted on it. Managers worked with the local community partners.”

“Improvements were required to ensure staff were safely recruited and had adequate time to undertake training. Several staff members completed many training topics on the same day. The provider did not complete any knowledge tests to demonstrate staff understanding of the training they had completed.”

“It was not always clear from recruitment records why an employment reference had not been obtained or why the staff members last adult social care role had not been contacted.”

“In addition, we found gaps in staff members knowledge around the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Community Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS) practices.”

“This left people at risk of avoidable harm and was a breach of regulation relating to staffing.”

“People's experience of this service”

“We spoke with people, relatives and professionals about the care provided. We made observations where people were supported. People and their relatives told us they were happy with staff members and the support they received. One relative told us, “The staff have been very good and when we visit you can tell they have a good relationship with [name of service user]”.”

“Relatives told us their loved one’s needs, including their communication needs were understood well by staff. Relatives felt staff’s knowledge of how to care for people with certain diagnoses was good. We were told of how some people had experienced good outcomes for their care with the support provided and were given examples of how staff had collaborated well with professionals. People and relatives, all said there were sufficient numbers of staff to support people. Everyone agreed staff supported people to have regular contact with their families. Everyone knew the leaders and who to speak with if they wished to raise an issue. We were told there were regular reviews of people’s care.”