Archived: Beecholme Support Services

Updated 1 June 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Our inspection took place on 27 April 2017 and 02 May 2017, and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service; we needed to be sure that someone would be in. The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Their area of expertise was in the support of older people.

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the services, including past inspection reports and notifications sent by and about the service. We also contacted other agencies including the local authority and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion which gathers information about people’s experiences of using health and social care in England.

We sent a Provider Information Return (PIR) which the provider returned to us on 9 March 2017. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with six people who used the service, and one person’s relative. We also spoke with four members of care staff, a director of the company, the registered manager and an external consultant working with the provider. We looked at a variety of documentation including; three people’s care records, three staff employment files, meeting minutes, policies and procedures and quality monitoring records.

Updated 1 June 2017

Our inspection took place on 27 April 2017 and 02 May 2017. We contacted people who used the service and staff on the first day, and visited the provider’s offices on the second. The inspection was announced.

At our last inspection on 08 March 2016 we rated the service as ‘requires improvement’ and identified two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We found references were not always sought for new employees, and there were no auditing systems in place to ensure directors had robust oversight of the service. These related to regulations 17 and 18. We asked the provider to send us an action plan. At our most recent inspection we saw the provider had taken sufficient action to meet legal requirements.

Beecholme Support Services provides care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time we inspected there were 19 people using the service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 told us they felt safe using the service, and we saw risks associated with care and support were well assessed and documented. There was clear and detailed guidance for staff to show how risks could be minimised. People were further protected because the provider followed safer recruitment practices, medicines were managed safely, and staff understood the principles of safeguarding.

People had not always received information about who would attend their calls; however the provider had recognised this and was taking action to improve. We saw there were sufficient staff to provide care and support; and call management systems were in place to ensure staff had time to travel between calls.

Staff received sufficient induction and training to be effective in their roles, and people told us staff used this training to provide effective care and support. Staff said they were supported by the provider with regular supervisions, and although some turnover of senior staff had caused delays in this process the registered manager had taken action to improve.

People told us they made choices in relation to their care and support, and we found staff had good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA).

People told us they were happy with the support they received with their meals.

We received positive feedback about the caring nature of staff. People told us they had good relationships with staff and that staff worked to protect their privacy and dignity. The provider was able to demonstrate good practices in relation to matters of equality and diversity, and we saw people were supported to maintain their independence as much as possible.

The provider worked with people, their families and other health and social care professionals to assess people’s needs before they began to use the service. We saw people were encouraged to be involved in the writing of their care plans. Care plans were regularly reviewed and staff were informed of any changes.

There were robust systems and policies in place to ensure complaints and concerns were responded to appropriately.

We received good feedback about management in the service. Staff told us they liked working for the company and would be happy for their families to use the service.

The provider had continued to develop quality monitoring activities in the service. We have made a recommendation about further improvements that could be made.