We carried out an announced inspection on 20 May and 27 March 2016.

Hertfordshire Supported Living Services provides personal care and support services to adults with a learning disability living in their own homes, within shared premises in the Hertfordshire area. The provider took over the running of the service in January 2016 as the previous provider had failed to provide good quality care to people using the service. At the time of the inspection, the provider was supporting five people with regulated activities.

The service has a Registered Manager in place. 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.

There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how risks to people could be minimised and how to safeguard people from the risk of possible harm.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there were sufficient staff to support people safely. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and would seek people’s consent before they provided any care or support. Staff received supervision and support, and had been trained to meet people’s individual needs.

People were supported by caring and respectful staff who knew them well. Relatives we spoke with said that there had been a positive change in the way people were cared for since the new provider had taken over. People were supported to go into the community and pursue their interests.

People had been assessed, and care plans took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. Staff supported people to access health and social care services when required and encouraged them to lead an independent life.

The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people and acted on the comments received to continually improve the quality of the service. The provider also had effective quality monitoring processes in place to ensure that they were meeting the required standards of care. However, they had not been effective in ensuring that the housing provider made the necessary repairs and adaptations to people’s homes.

During our visit we spoke with two people who used the service. Two other people were invited to speak with us but did not wish to. The other four people were unavailable as they were out in the community going about their daily lives. Both of the people we spoke with described all the staff who provided them with support as, "very nice."

We observed that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. We saw that support plans and risk assessments were informative and up to date. Staff we spoke with were aware of their contents, which supported them to deliver appropriate and safe care. Staff recruitment systems were robust.

The provider had a range of quality monitoring systems in place to ensure that care was being delivered appropriately by staff in line with individual care plans, and that people were satisfied with the service they were receiving.

During our visit on 06 March 2013, we spoke with four people who use the service. Everyone we spoke with said they were happy with the care they received from the provider. One person said, “Staff speak to me with respect." Another person said, “They are alright, they are cool, I have no problems."

We found the provider had systems in place to ensure people were making informed decisions about their care. We also found that people's care plans and risk assessments were reviewed regularly to ensure people were receiving the care they needed. The provider had policies and procedures in place to protect people from abuse or unsafe care. There were quality assurance systems to assess, monitor and evaluate the quality of service provided. We noted that the provider had done a comprehensive assessment of the number of staff needed to support people who use the service.