About the service:

Freeman College provides accommodation and personal care for students between the ages of 16 and 25 with complex learning and behavioural difficulties, who are also in the education sector. Residential students live in team houses in the local community. There were six students living in these houses at the time of the inspection. Two students were living in share lives placements.

This service provides care and support to students living in 'supported living' settings, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service was exceptional at ensuring students were at the heart of the service and its values. Its vision was very clear and it had a strong person-centred ethos to promote the independence of students, empowering them and supporting them to achieve outcomes. Staff and documentation exhibited this.

Holistic support plans were very detailed and written from the students' perspective.

Students were supported to express their views and have choice over all aspects of their daily lives. Students were supported to make decisions and documents showed how decisions were led, considered and reached by students.

Students' independence was paramount and relatives spoke highly of how this was encouraged and enabled. Students' privacy and dignity was respected.

Students were safe.

There was a robust safeguarding system in place; students and staff were aware of the procedure and how to raise concerns.

Positive risk assessments were in place which supported students to develop and maintain their independence whilst keeping them safe.

Students’ needs and choices were assessed according to their wishes and outcomes were monitored to ensure students get the level of support they need.

Staff were generally well-trained, however there were some staff who had not had up-to-date training in line with provider policies.

Students’ nutritional health was monitored and they were encouraged and supported to eat healthily; growing much of their own vegetables.

Consent was asked and recorded for all aspects of students’ lives; staff were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act and its principles.

Concerns and complaints were monitored and action taken when appropriate.

Rating at last inspection:

At our last inspection the service was rated good (11 November 2016).

Why we inspected:

This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people receive.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor information and intelligence we receive about the service to ensure care remains safe and of good quality. We will return to re-inspect in line with our inspection timescales for good services, however if any information of concern is received, we may inspect sooner .

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

This inspection took place the 13 October 2016. The registered manager was given short notice before our inspection that we would be visiting the service. We did this because the registered manager is sometimes out of the office and we needed to be sure that they would be available. We also wanted to arrange to speak with students who used the service. The service was last inspected 12 February 2014 and was meeting the requirements of the regulations we checked at that time. This was the first rated inspection of the service.

Freeman College is based in Sheffield city centre. It has offices within the college. The office is accessible to wheelchair users via a lift. At the time of this inspection the service was supporting 11 students. Five students were being supported in one of the student houses or flat and six students were living with a shared lives provider.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with CQC. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Students spoken with told us that they felt “safe” and would speak with staff, a family member or a shared lives provider if they had any concerns or worries.

Support plans gave guidance to staff in how they should respond to promote student well-being and how they should react to de-escalate increasing agitation and anxiety.

All staff spoken with were clear about what their roles and responsibilities were and what action they would take if they saw or suspected any abuse.

Students told us they were treated with dignity and respect.

Students living in the student houses or flat received care from the same group of support staff. The registered manager told us if agency staff were used to support students they worked alongside a member of staff.

There was a robust on call system available for staff and shared lives providers to call for assistance out of college hours.

The registered provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines so students were protected from the risks associated with them.

Robust recruitment procedures were in place and appropriate checks were undertaken before staff started work. These meant students were cared for by suitably qualified staff who had been assessed as safe to work with student.

The service enabled students to carry out person centred activities within the service and in the community and encouraged them to maintain hobbies and interests.

Students spoken with told us they were satisfied with the quality of support they had received and made positive comments about the staff and their shared lives provider

There was evidence of involvement from other professionals when students became unwell.

Good health and nutrition was promoted for students.

Staff told us they enjoyed supporting students using the service. Staff were able to describe students individual needs, likes and dislikes.

Staff received ongoing training and were encouraged to extend their knowledge and develop new skills. All staff received a detailed induction and understood their roles and responsibilities, as well as the values and ethos of the service.

Staff told us they felt supported by the senior managers at the service.

The registered provider had a complaint’s process in place to enable them to respond to student and/or their representative’s concerns, investigate them and take action to address their concerns.

Accidents and untoward occurrences were monitored by the registered manager to ensure any trends were identified.

The service had a system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that students received.

Students were involved with the service in a meaningful way, helping to dr

We spoke privately with five students being supported either in one of the team houses (supported living accommodation) or by a shared lives provider. Students told us that their opinions were sought so they were involved in decisions and that they were involved in tasks within the team houses or in the shared lives provider’s home.

Students we spoke with made positive comments about the staff and the shared lives providers and were satisfied with the quality of support they received. Student’s comments included: “[shared lives providers] are really good, they know what kind of care students need and they know how to support students”, “we have some very good shared lives providers, they will take care of you” and “the staff at the team house are really nice, very good quality of staff”.

All the students spoken with told us that they felt “safe” and would speak with staff, a family member or a shared lives provider if they had any concerns or worries. All staff spoken with were clear about what their roles and responsibilities were and what action they would take if they saw or suspected any abuse.

Students were supported by staff and shared lives providers who were supported to deliver support to an appropriate standard.

The service had a system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that student's received.