You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

We are carrying out a review of quality at Brent Shared Lives. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

We undertook an announced inspection on 12 April 2017 of Brent Shared Lives (BSL). BSL trains and supports shared lives carers (carers) who provide personal care and support for people within their own family homes and community to enable people to live as independently as possible. BSL caters for adults who have a disability or for older adults with care needs. At the time of the inspection, 31 people were using the service and 11 people were receiving respite care. The service employs 2 case workers and 19 approved carers.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission [CQC] 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.

At the last inspection on 27 January 2015, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People's health and social care needs had been appropriately assessed. Care plans were person-centred, and specific to each person and their needs. Care preferences were documented and carers we spoke with were aware of people's likes and dislikes. Care plans were reviewed and were updated when people's needs changed.

Systems and processes were in place to help protect people from the risk of harm. Carers had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to recognise and report any concerns or allegations of abuse.

Systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines safely. Arrangements were in place for the recording of medicines, administration and disposal.

Carers had been carefully recruited and provided with induction and training to enable them to support people effectively. They had the necessary support, supervision and appraisals from management.

Carers we spoke with had an understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Capacity to make specific decisions was recorded in people's care plans.

People were supported with the nutritional and hydration needs. Carers were aware of people’s dietary requirements and the support they needed with their food and drink.

Carers told us that they received up to date information about the service and had an opportunity to share good practice and any concerns they had at team meetings.

There was a management structure in place with a team of carers, two case workers, the registered manager and the provider. Carers spoke positively about working for the service.

Feedback about the service was sought through questionnaires. Feedback was generally positive about the service people received. However, there were no robust audits in place to assess and evaluate the service to ensure areas were being effectively managed and areas of improvement identified.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was safe. People told us they felt safe living with their carers.

Some risks to people were identified and managed so that people were safe and their freedom supported and protected.

Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to the management and administration of medicines.

Appropriate employment checks were carried out before staff started working at the service.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was effective. Carers were supervised and felt supported by their peers and the deputy manager.

There were arrangements in place to obtain, and act in accordance with the consent of people using the service.

People had access to healthcare professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was caring. People told us that they were satisfied with the care and support provided by their carers.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

Review of people’s care meetings had been conducted with relevant healthcare professionals in which aspects of their care was discussed.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Care plans were person-centred, detailed and specific to each person and their needs.

There were arrangements in place so people using the service were able to follow their interests and maintain links with the wider community.

There were clear procedures for receiving, handling and responding to comments and complaints.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 7 June 2017

Some aspects of the service were not led. Feedback about the service was sought through questionnaires. However there was no effective auditing in place to assess and improve the quality of service being provided.

Carers spoke positively about working for the service and the management.

The management structure consisted of a team of case workers, the registered manager and the provider.