A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to look at the agency’s reporting of notifications and to look at additional outcomes. We answered our five questions; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well led?

As part of this inspection we spoke with three people who used the service. We also spoke with the owners, one of whom is also the registered manager, two care staff and the administrator. The agency provided support to 20 people living in the Hastings, St Leonards and Bexhill area.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe and that they were treated with dignity and respect. Staff received training in safeguarding and risk assessments were in place for people and were regularly reviewed.

There were systems in place to demonstrate that all staff received regular supervision.

Is the service effective?

People told us they were happy and that their needs had been met. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and it was evident that they knew people well. If people had complex needs, specialist advice and support had been sought to assist staff. Staff had also received training to meet the needs of the people the agency supported.

Is the service caring?

People told us that they were treated with respect and dignity.

One person told us, “I would give staff 1000/10, they are brilliant. There is always someone to talk to.” Another person told us, “Staff are wonderful, I have help when I want it.”

Is the service responsive?

People were assessed prior to admission so that staff could have a comprehensive picture of the person and the areas in which they needed support.

Care plans reflected people’s needs, choices and preferences and had been reviewed.

Complaints and concerns were documented well. However, there were no records in place detailing how the matters had been investigated and the outcome.

Is the service well led?

The organisation had a range of measures to monitor the quality of the service provided. However, systems to follow up and deal with shortfalls identified were not robust.

The organisation worked well with other external agencies. However, notifications of incidents that the provider is required to send us by law were not sent to us in a timely manner.

We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

We spoke to five of the people who lived in the supported living accommodation and who used the service. Feedback received was positive about the care and support provided at by Independent Living Pathways. One person said ''Really happy here, the staff are nice.''

We examined care plans and saw evidence that delivery of care was person centred. Care plans and activities were designed and carried out to give people new experiences and independence while keeping them safe. People told us they were given choices about their support and care and were looked after in a respectful way. Staff were seen to be supportive and responsive to people's needs, promoting their independence and wellbeing.

Records we examined showed that there were appropriate checks made that ensured the home recruited suitable staff. Staff we spoke with felt well supported and enjoyed working at the home. The provider had introduced an effective system that ensured that CQC were informed of all incidents that occurred in a timely manner. People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records had been maintained.

We spoke to two of the four people who lived in the supported living accommodation and who used the service. Feedback received was positive about the care and support provided at by Independent Living Pathways. One person said ‘’I am happy here, the staff are good and I can always talk to a certain person here, she listens and helps me.’’ People told us they were given choices about their care and were looked after in a respectful way. Staff were seen to be supportive and responsive to people’s needs, promoting independence and health. However, we found the supporting care documentation lacked evidence of individual assessment and care planning for staff to follow.

We looked at the systems and processes the home had in place to respond to complaints and to protect people from abuse. These processes ensured complaints could be raised and that they were fully investigated. Staff knew what constituted abuse and what to do if it was suspected.

We reviewed the recruitment practice and found the practice followed some concerns about the process.

We looked at records held in the home and systems for reporting important events to the Care Quality Commission (CQC). Suitable care records were not being maintained and suitable staff records were not available. We found that records were not always stored securely, or able to be located promptly. Systems for reporting important events as required were not established.

Independent Living Pathways provides care and support through a Domiciliary Care Agency (DCA) to adults with mental health problems who live in leased accommodation with tenancy agreements. These adults live in supported living accommodation and have tailored support packages with an aim to promote more independent living within the community. At the time of this inspection seven people were receiving care and support from the DCA.

This inspection took place on and 25 and 30 November 2015 and was announced with 48 hour notice given.

The service had a registered manager. 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 quality monitoring systems and governance systems needed further development to ensure they were used to identify shortfalls and demonstrate effective responses. This included robust recruitment practice for staff.

People were cared for by staff who had not all been recruited through safe procedures. Recruitment checks such as two written references had not always been received prior to new staff working in the service.

The provider was not consistently operating the service in line with their registration requirements. Tenancy agreements were not clear that care and support were provided separately from the accommodation, as required for supported living. The operation of the service was also being conducted from an office which was not registered. We were advised a suitable application had been submitted to address this matter.

People's individual care and support needs were assessed before they were provided with a service. Care and support provided was personalised and based on the identified needs of each individual. People were supported to develop their life skills and increase their independence. People, where possible, were supported to move onto further accommodation where they could be more independent, for example into their own flat. People’s care and support plans and risk assessments were detailed and reviewed regularly. People told us they had felt involved and listened to.

People were supported to access health care professionals routinely and as required as a result of changes in health. Staff were aware of the processes they needed to follow to raise concerns about people’s health. All appointments with, or visits by, health care professionals were recorded in individual care plans. There were procedures in place to ensure the safe administration of medicines. People were supported to take their medicines and increase their independence within a risk management framework.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe and meet their care and support needs. The number of staff on duty had enabled people to be supported to attend educational courses, day care, social activities and to develop their life skills to become more independent. People felt well supported, and were encouraged to be as independent as possible. We observed friendly and genuine relationships had developed between people and staff. People spoke positively about the registered manager and said that they could approach them about any issues they wanted to.

Staff told us they were supported to develop their skills and knowledge by receiving training which helped them to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively. Training records were kept up-to-date, plans were in place to promote good practice and develop the knowledge and skills of staff. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding procedures.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service which included satisfaction surveys and meetings with staff and people who used the service.