Solution Care 247 Northamptonshire

“This assessment was carried out to ensure compliance with previous enforcement action taken against the service for breaches of regulation in relation to consent, safety and managerial oversight of the service. This was a focussed assessment and we assessed a total of 12 quality statements. We 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. We found the provider was no longer in breach of regulation.”

“At the time of our assessment there were 3 people receiving a regulated activity from the service. As part of our assessment activity, we undertook an on-site visit on 26 September 2025.”

“This assessment was carried out by 1 inspector.”

“During this assessment we spoke with 1 person and 2 person’s relatives who advocate on their behalf. We also spoke with 3 staff members including the registered manager, deputy manager and a consultant commissioned by the service. We received feedback from 10 support workers.”

“At our last assessment the service was rated requires improvement. At this assessment we found the service was good.”

“Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored for trends and patterns. Information about people and their needs was available for sharing in an emergency to ensure a smooth transition between services. Risks to people were assessed and mitigated, however, we found some people’s risk assessments contained some general information that wasn’t applicable to them. The provider ensured the environment was assessed and risks mitigated, staff had detailed information on what to do in an emergency. For example, where to find the gas mains isolator. People were not receiving support with medicines at the time of the assessment; however, staff were occasionally supporting with over the counter medicines with no risk assessment or guidance in place. This was actioned during the assessment.”

“People’s needs were assessed and care planned to ensure their needs were met. Good practice tools were used to assess risks levels for people. People were independent with their health care needs, staff required further training to ensure they were competent to manage future more complex health needs for a person. Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were in place where needed. Staff had a good understanding of consent.”

“The provider had made improvements, however, some areas required further development and embedding into practice. The provider had commissioned a consultant to support them. Staff told us they felt involved in learning and improving the service.”