Archived: Crossroads Care Ribble Valley

This service provides personal care to adults and children living in their own homes. This included a service to provide practical support to enable carers to have a break from their caring responsibilities.

Not everyone using Crossroads Care Ribble Valley receives the regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with personal care; which means help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do receive personal care we also take into account any wider social care provided.

Crossroads Care Ribble Valley provides a service to older adults, older adults living with a dementia, younger adults with mental ill health, children and younger adults with a learning disability.

The agency's office is located on the outskirts of Clitheroe. At the time of the inspection the service was providing care and support to 79 people.

At our last inspection on 26 and 27 August 2015 the overall rating of the service was ‘Good.’ At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

We found there were management and leadership arrangements in place to support the effective day to day running of the service. There were systems in place to consult with people who used the service and staff, to assess and monitor the quality of their experiences and make improvements.

Arrangements were in place to ensure staff were properly checked before working at the service.

Systems were in place to ensure staff received ongoing training/learning and supervision. There were sufficient numbers of staff at the service. Staff were aware of the signs and indicators of abuse and they knew what to do if they had any concerns. Staff had received training on safeguarding and protection matters.

Risks to people’s individual well-being were being assessed and processes were in place to support people safely with their medicines. Some matters needed to improve; but we found the registered manager had started introducing further safeguards. Systems were in place to support people in maintaining a safe and clean home environment.

Arrangements were in place to gather information on people’s backgrounds, their needs, abilities, preferences and routines before they used the service. Each person had care records, describing their individual needs, preferences and routines. We found some records lacked detail and included generalised comments one care plan was not fit for purpose. However it was clear that improvements were being made. People’s needs and choices were kept under review and changes were responded to.

People’s individual dietary needs, likes and dislikes were known. Arrangements were in place to support people with meals and drinks as appropriate.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Policies and processes at the service supported this practice. Processes were in place to support people with any concerns or complaints.

People were supported were supported with their healthcare needs. Changes in people’s health and well-being were monitored and responded to. Where people received end of life care this was planned and provided sensitively.

People made positive comments about the staff team including their friendly approach, listening skills and respectful manners. Staff expressed a practical awareness of responding to people as individuals and promoting their rights, privacy and choices. Where appropriate, people were supported to engage in meaningful activities the community.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

People were being involved in planning and consenting to their care and support and were enabled to make decisions about matters which affected them. We found some progress could be made in ensuring staff are aware of the action to take, when people can't make their own choices and decisions.

People told us the care and support they received was good and that they had care plans describing how their support should be provided.

People said they liked the staff that provided their care and support. They said they were mostly on time; they described them as 'Polite' and 'Helpful'.

Satisfactory arrangements were in place to promote good hygiene standards and prevent infections.

People had access to a complaints procedure and indicated an awareness of the action to take if raising concerns. However, we found some progress could be made with complaints processes; including ensuring procedures include all the appropriate contact details.

People told us they were involved in planning their care and support package. They told us the care they received was good and that they had care plans which explained their needs and how their support should be provided.

People considered they were treated with dignity and said their privacy was respected. They had no concerns about their care and treatment; they said they felt safe with the staff.

People told us they told us they liked the staff. They told us the staff were helpful, punctual, well trained and experienced.

People said they were asked about the quality of the service. We found ongoing checks on the various systems and practices were being carried out.