We carried out a review of the data available to us about Slough Crossroads - Caring for Carers on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Slough Crossroads - Caring for Carers, you can give feedback on this service.
Slough Crossroads is a domiciliary care agency (DCA) registered to provide personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the Slough area. It provides a service to both younger and older adults. At the time of the inspection the agency was providing personal care and support to six people.
People’s experience of using this service:
Relatives of people using the service, gave consistent positive feedback about how pleased they were with the service and staff. They described the staff as caring and supportive. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff. People were supported to be independent and were in control of the support they had.
People’s care plans were individual and described their needs and preferences. They were person centred and described ways staff could support people to access the things they enjoyed and to provide emotional support.
Relatives of people using the service told us that they had no concerns about the safety or well-being of their family members in the presence of care staff. There were sufficient numbers of safely recruited and appropriately trained staff. Individual risks were identified and staff had risk management guidelines and used these to inform the support they provided to people.
People received their care from consistent staff who arrived when expected, or alerted people if delays occurred. Information was shared effectively amongst the staff team to ensure people received consistent care. The provider worked with other professionals to help people receive coordinated support.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported to access health professionals and maintain good diet and nutrition.
People were issued with information about the service which explained how to make a complaint if they were unhappy.
Relatives of people in the service, staff and professionals we received feedback from had confidence in the management of the service. The registered manager and staff recognised their roles and responsibilities. Quality and safety issues were monitored across the service by the registered manager and the provider.
Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 11 May 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a scheduled, planned inspection based on the service’s previous rating.
Follow up: We will monitor all intelligence received about the service to inform the assessment of the risk profile of the service and to ensure the next planned inspection is scheduled accordingly.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection took place on the 3 March 2016. We gave 48 hours’ notice of the inspection to make sure the people we needed to speak with would be available. We previously inspected the service on 12 September 2013. The service was meeting the requirements of the regulations at that time.
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.
People were positive about the quality of the care they received and the capability of the care staff who supported them. They were satisfied care staff stayed for the time they were supposed to.
People’s safety was maintained and protected. Staff were aware of the service’s safeguarding procedure and were able to describe what they would do if they suspected someone was being abused in any way. The service responded appropriately to any safeguarding concerns they became aware of.
Staff received the training and support they required to provide a high standard of care to meet people’s needs. Care plans set out clearly how people preferred their care to be provided. People were involved in making decisions about their care.
The provider sought feedback from staff, people who received care, their relatives and from professionals responsible for arranging care. This information was then used to improve the service provided to people.
All the people we spoke with said that staff acted with their consent. One person told us, "They always ask for my consent, for example, whether I would like to go to the garden centre, have a walk in the park or go for shopping, it's always my decision.' Another person told us 'I try to do as much as I can myself, the rest they help me out with, but only with my permission.'
People told us that they were happy with the staff's standard of hygiene and cleaning and that that staff used disposable gloves and aprons when undertaking personal care. One person told us 'Staff always wear protective clothing when they assist with personal care.'
People described the staff as 'Very good', 'Excellent' and 'Very caring.' We found people were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.
We found the provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.
People's needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We saw risks relating to the person had been indentified and assessed. Staff members were aware of the importance of safeguarding. People said they felt safe with staff entering their homes to provide them with support. People told us staff spoke to them in a calm and polite manner.
There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place and appropriate checks were undertaken. There was a system in place to listen to any complaints people had. Records were kept of complaints received at the service and how they had been responded to. People we spoke with did not have any complaints about their care.