You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 8 July 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Beacon Extracare is a domiciliary care service, which provides personal care for older people living in sheltered housing flats and within the community. People using the service are mainly blind or partially sighted with a sensory impairment, but may also experience Dementia, learning disabilities or Autism. At the time of the inspection 45 people on site and 32 within the community were receiving care.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were supported by staff to remain safe. There were enough staff available to people and people’s needs were attended to in a timely manner. Risk assessments were in place to minimise any potential risk to people’s wellbeing. Staff were recruited in a safe way. People received their medicines as expected.

Staff knew people’s needs. Staff received training and had been provided with an induction and felt able to approach the registered manager with any concerns. People were assisted to receive food and drinks by staff where required. People were supported to maintain their health.

People were supported to have choice and control over their lives and staff understood that they should support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff ensured that people’s privacy and dignity was maintained.

People's care plans reflected their needs and preferences and staff understood the care that people required. Complaints were dealt with appropriately in line with the complaints’ procedure.

Quality monitoring systems were in place. Feedback was taken from people and used to inform the service. People knew the registered manager and felt they were approachable.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good. (Report Published 13 January 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection carried out on 26 October 2016

During a routine inspection

This unannounced inspection took place on 26 October 2016.

Beacon Extracare provides personal care and support to blind and visually impaired people within a complex of flats. People have communal facilities including shops, hairdresser, lounges and a restaurant available to them. In addition a community team of carers provided support to people living within the community in their own homes. At the time of our visit the service was providing personal care to 42 people.

The service has 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.

People had not experienced any missed calls but some people described carers at times being rushed and not staying for the agreed length of time. Systems were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. However, these needed to be more robust to ensure that the service provided was safe. Some hazards were identified in the communal kitchen which could pose a risk to blind and visually impaired people. People and their relatives were encouraged to provide their views on the quality of the service but it was not clear how improvements were being made to enhance people's experiences.

Carers had received training in abuse and understood the signs of abuse and their responsibilities to keep people safe. Risks to people's health had been assessed, regularly reviewed and were well understood by carers. Regular monitoring and analysis of incidents that occurred at the service was undertaken to identify and act upon any patterns or trends developing. The provider operated safe recruitment practices. People were appropriately supported by carers with their medicines.

People were supported by carers who had regular supervision and had undertaken an effective induction when they started working at the service. Further training had been identified and planned for to ensure carers had the skills needed to support people safely. The registered manager had complied with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Carers supported people in line with these principles. However carers had not all received training in this area. People were supported with their nutritional and health care needs.

People had positive caring relationships with the carers. Support plans provided carers with guidance as to how people wished their care to be delivered. People were supported to make their own decisions and maintain their independence. People's privacy and dignity were protected.

People had been involved in developing their support plan to reflect their needs and their preferred routines. Carers were responsive to their needs. Communication between carers was effective and ensured people's changing needs and wellbeing was acted upon. People had access to a range of community facilities which reduced the risk of isolation. When people had raised concerns or complaints the registered manager had acted to resolve these.

People were positive that they had access to the registered manager to discuss their experiences. The registered manager understood their responsibilities for reporting certain incidents and events to us that had occurred at the service or affected people who used the service.

Inspection carried out on 7 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with 14 of the 30 people receiving personal care, three carers and the manager.

People were happy with the support provided and described carers as kind, respectful and punctual. One person said, "We live in our own apartments and carers assist us, they would always ask before doing anything�. People were provided with information prior to consenting to any support. Support plans confirmed people had been consulted and had consented to support.

People had been fully consulted about their needs and support plans reflected what assistance they needed. Plans were personal to people�s individual needs and provided guidance to staff on supporting people in the manner they had chosen.

People could choose options to suit them in relation to meals. A meal package system meant people could opt to have all or some of their meals provided as part of their support package, so that they could eat and drink sufficient amounts.

People had support to manage their medicines particularly where they needed support due to their sight loss.

There were systems in place to regularly review the quality of the service. One person told us, "We are always asked for our opinion they are very good".

People's personal information was stored safely and remained confidential. Records were well maintained and up to date.

Inspection carried out on 11 March 2013

During a routine inspection

There were 28 people receiving personal care on the day of our inspection. We spoke with seven people who used the service and two families. We also spoke with the manager, three carers, the scheme manager and caretaker. We looked at the care records for five people using the service.

People told us that they had been fully involved in identifying the support that they wanted, and they had the amount of care calls they needed. One person said, "The staff are reliable and available both day and night�.

Care records reflected people�s support needs, particularly where they needed support due to their sight loss. Plans included people�s routines and preferences so that they had the care they needed in the way they wanted it.

People told us they felt safe and had confidence in the staff that supported them. One person told us, "It�s really nice here and I feel much safer than in my previous home�.

The modern design of the building made it easier and safe for visually impaired people to move around independently. The use of natural light, automatic lighting and contrasting colours for d�cor and furnishings, made the premises more suitable to blind and visually impaired people.

People told us there were enough carers to see to their needs. We saw carers had specific training to meet the needs of blind and visually impaired people.

People told us they were regularly asked their opinions and were confident their complaints would be managed without delay.