Beckford Lodge, known as the Ordinary Life Project Association (OLPA), is a supported living service registered to provide personal care to people. Supported living services enable people to live in their own home and live their lives as independently as possible. The support offered by Beckford Lodge included personal care, shopping, budgeting and supporting people to access their community and take part in activities. The registered manager explained that the support hours provided varied depending on the person’s needs. At the time of our inspection one person was using the service under the regulated activity of personal care.

The inspection took place on the 17 October 2016 and was announced, which meant the provider knew before the inspection we would be visiting. This was because the location provides supported living services. We wanted to make sure the registered manager would be available to support our inspection, or someone who could act on their behalf.

A registered manager was employed by the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were actively involved in developing their care and support plans. Care plans were personalised and detailed the daily routines specific to the person using the service. Where people required support with their personal care they were able to make choices and be as independent as possible.

People had a range of activities they could be involved in. People were able to choose what activities they took part in and suggest other activities they would like to complete. Staff provided support as required.

Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and plans were in place to minimise these risks. Staff received training to help them identify safeguarding concerns and understand their responsibilities on reporting any concerns identified.

We looked at the arrangements in place to manage complaints and concerns that were brought to the registered manager’s attention. The service had a complaints procedure in place setting out how complaints could be made and how they would be handled. There had not been any complaints since the service had registered.

People’s medicines were managed safely and people were able to self-administer their medicines with some support from staff. Where required people were supported to access healthcare services to maintain and support good health.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s care needs. Safe recruitment procedures ensured people were supported by staff with the appropriate experience and character. People were supported by staff that had access to a range of training to develop the skills and knowledge needed to carry out their roles. New staff were supported to complete an induction programme before working on their own.

People were supported to have a meal of their choice. They were supported with planning their weekly menu and shopping for their chosen food. Staff encouraged people to drink sufficient fluids.

There was a registered manager in post. The registered manager carried out regular audits to monitor the quality of the service.

The provider offered a range of care and support services, including residential, supported living and an outreach service. At the time of the inspection, the service was providing personal care to one person.

People referred to the service were assessed initially by the registered manager. The 'needs assessment' considered communication, accommodation and living arrangements, relationships with, and views of others, diversity, social activities and support, caring responsibilities, finance, household management, health and emotional well being, with details of medications, dental and optical arrangements, nutritional needs, end of life choices and capacity.

The registered manager explained that the care and support visits were delivered with flexibility, to suit the needs and preferences of the people receiving the support.

People receiving the service acknowledged, in response to the annual survey, that they been involved in planning their care and support plan, they received the care that was agreed, and that the staff were respectful to them.

Staff confirmed that they had received supervision sessions on a monthly basis and that they were clear about what was expected from them, and they regularly received feedback on how they were progressing within their role. Positive comments were received about the provider, one member of staff said "they are fantastic and so supportive".

People using the service preferred not to be visited by us in their own home. We read from the most recent survey which was returned by people using the service that they received the support and care they wanted and had regular meetings to discuss any changes to their support.

The manager told us that people were encouraged to do a lot of things for themselves but had support from staff with tasks such as bathing, shopping and dealing with other agencies. We were told this sort of support helped people to be independent and “was driven by the person using the service.”

In the recent survey by the service, people said they appreciated their keyworker and wanted to keep the same one. People said they found staff were flexible and willing to change the ways they provided their support.

Staff told us they felt supported in their work, were encouraged to develop and had good opportunities for training.

The provider had set up systems for gaining feedback from the people who used the service and for monitoring the quality of service the people received.

We saw how people received different kinds of support to match their different needs. A person explained how they could choose to use less than their weekly allocation of support hours. This meant they could ‘bank’ hours to use for additional support another time, for example, for staff accompaniment to a short break away.

We saw that risk assessments were used, to help plan how people could be encouraged to become more independent.

A person we met valued support with menu planning and shopping. They and their support worker had worked out ways of safely managing how to have hot meals when at home without support.

A person chose to have their regular support worker with them in their annual reviews with a care manager. This helped the person contribute to and understand the review process.

A person told us they valued always having the same support worker, who had built up a good knowledge of their needs, likes and dislikes. They also had a close working relationship with a relief worker, who covered any absence of the main support worker.