Equal Partnerships is a domiciliary care and supported living service based in Longbenton, Newcastle. The service provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes, who have a learning disability and/or autism spectrum disorder. Some people also have a sensory impairment. At the time of our inspection 19 people received care from the service.

At our last inspection in July and August 2014, the service was rated as ‘Outstanding'. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Outstanding' and all the fundamental standards we inspected against were met.

This inspection took place on the 22 and 23 March 2017 and was announced. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Under this provider's registration with the Commission there is a requirement that a registered manager needs to be in post to manage the carrying on of the regulated activity at this location. One of the providers and owners of the company had taken on this role and they had been registered with the Commission as the registered manager of the service since December 2010. 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. The other provider had assumed the position of nominated individual for the service as required by their registration with the Commission.

People's safety was paramount. Risks were appropriately assessed and managed. The service actively promoted positive risk taking so that people could live fulfilling lives, that were as independent as possible, whilst still remaining safe. People had been supported to travel independently within the community and arrangements were in place for staff to oversee that they did so safely. Staff had developed positive and meaningful relationships with people and encouraged them to overcome challenges and risks to achieve their goals.

People were encouraged and supported to manage risks within their own home environments. Regular checks on fire safety equipment and utilities were carried out, and servicing undertaken where necessary in line with best practice guidelines.

Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place to aid and guide staff about how to protect people from different forms of harm and abuse. Staff were fully aware of their personal responsibilities to safeguard vulnerable people in their care and they had no hesitation in reporting concerns. Any historic issues that had come to light had been dealt with appropriately and measures put in place to monitor and highlight any future concerns. The providers promoted an open culture and staff told us that any safety concerns raised at any time were dealt with very promptly by the providers.

Staffing levels were decided by people's needs, how they lived their lives and what support they therefore needed. Staff were structured in small teams supporting any number of individuals who lived in their own accommodations settings, some people shared houses, some people lived alone. Each staff team reported to a manager. All gaps in staffing for example, due to annual leave and sickness, were covered internally by other members of staff within the service.

The recruitment of staff was robust and appropriate vetting checks were in place to ensure that potential new staff were of suitable character to work with vulnerable people. People were actively involved in the recruitment process, as were their relatives. They drafted job adverts together with the providers and also interviewed potential new staff. Staff were appropriately inducted, trained, supervised, appraised and given opportunities for development. The providers told us they felt strongly that staff needed to be supported as much as people, so that they could give the best care a

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

This was an announced inspection carried out on 15 July 2014 and 4 August 2014. We carried out this inspection at short notice because we needed to check that the registered manager, or another senior person in the service, would be available to speak with us at the time of our visit.

We last inspected the service in June 2013 and found at that time the provider was meeting all regulations covered.

Equal Partnerships provides personal support to people who have learning disabilities and live in their own home. At the time of our inspection 16 people were receiving personal support.

The service had a registered manager and a responsible person (two Directors). 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 told us they felt safe receiving support from Equal Partnerships. Family members told us they felt confident in the fact their relatives were well looked after.

We noted the service encouraged positive risk taking and did not restrict people’s interests and encouraged them to try new things. We saw that risk assessments were completed on an individual basis.

People told us they were fully involved in recruiting and selecting their team of support staff. We saw that each recruitment campaign was individual to the person. People and their family members told us they had been involved in interviews and selections.

We saw that the staffing team were dynamic and each individual had a personal budget and chose on a weekly basis the support they wanted to receive and what they wanted to do with their time.

We saw staff training was regularly completed and was up to date. Staff told us they received essential training but also training specific to the people they were supporting. We saw that supervision and appraisals were regularly completed. The service had involved people in part of the supervision process and where comfortable, they helped to conduct a part of the supervision session.

We saw that external professionals were regularly involved where needed, for example we saw the speech and language therapists were involved and had helped support a person to communicate with an emotion board. Staff and the managers told us, other professionals were used to support with people’s permission.

People, relatives and staff were all positive about the care provided. One relative we spoke to said, “We have one of the best providers in the country and it’s very well known in Tyneside. The care they provide for my [relative] has been the making of them.” Another relative said, “My [relative] is the best testimony to the standard of the company, he tells everyone how he now loves his life. His happiness has always been our goal and we’ve reached it with Equal Partnerships.”

We saw that the service worked with people to arrange and support them to try new things. We saw activities were varied and regular. We noted the organisation supported people to attend a number of group events as well as supporting them to fulfil individual passions.

The service had developed a complaints card which had a number of variations depending upon people’s abilities. The card and the complaints policy were available but no complaints had been received. People and their relatives told us they could raise anything if it was needed but that they were exceptionally happy with the service they received.

Everyone we spoke with was very positive about the ethos of the organisation and the support of the two managers. One relative said, “These two people who run it really understand what my [relative] needs and they infect everyone with their enthusiasm. They’re brilliant.” Another relative said, “They are so special the people that run it, they really care and they not only value our [relative] but us as well. They know that we have experience that they can use and include us in everything.”