Background to this inspection
Updated
12 May 2015
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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.
This inspection was conducted by one inspector over two days; 7 and 15 October 2014 and was unannounced.
Before we visited the care home we checked the information that we held about the service and the service provider. No concerns had been raised by people who used the service, their representatives or other agencies since we completed our last inspection of this service in May 2013. No breaches of Regulations were found when we last inspected this service.
Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This 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 our inspection we observed how staff interacted with the three people who were using the respite service. We looked at how people were supported during the day and also reviewed a range of care records and records about how the service was managed.
We met the three people using this service at the time of our visit. The three people we met were not able to give us detailed feedback about their views of the service, but were able to indicate ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to our questions. We also spoke with two relatives of people using the service, the registered manager, assistant network manager and four support workers. We contacted two health professionals following our inspection, to seek their feedback on the quality of the service provided, but neither of the people we contacted responded to our request.
Updated
12 May 2015
This inspection took place over two days, 7 and 15 October 2014, and was unannounced.
This care home provides short periods of respite care for a maximum of five people with learning disabilities, who may also have a physical disability. People can have up to 42 days respite care per year and periods of stay are planned and booked in advance.
Approximately 70 people were using the respite service at the time of our inspection. There are three other properties in the Short Breaks network in addition to this care home. The four care homes are line-managed by an assistant network manager and network manager and support staff provide 24-hour care and support to people who use the service. The network manager, who is also the registered manager, has overall responsibility for the four care homes. 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.
Support staff were confident in describing the different kinds of abuse and the signs and symptoms that would suggest a person they supported might be at risk of abuse. They knew what action to take to safeguard people from harm.
A robust system was in place to identify and assess the risks associated with providing care and support. Relatives told us and care records confirmed, that risks had been managed well to keep people safe from accidental harm.
Care records contained detailed information about people's likes, dislikes, preferences and personal histories. This gave staff the information they needed to provide appropriate person-centred support.
Staff working in the home understood the needs of the people they supported. They supported people in making choices and their own decisions as much as possible. People and their relatives told us they were happy with the care provided.
The two relatives we spoke with knew about the home's complaints procedure. They were confident that complaints would be dealt with appropriately.
People who used this service received safe care and support from a trained and skilled team of staff. The induction of new staff was robust and they received regular support and mentoring from more senior staff during the 12 weeks following their appointment. This had been supplemented by further training to equip staff with specific skills, which enabled them to provide person-centred care to people who used the service. Staff fully understood their caring responsibilities and they demonstrated respect for the rights of the people they supported.
During our visit we saw examples of staff treating people with respect and dignity. People using the service and their relatives were consulted and involved in assessments, care planning and the development of the service.
We saw evidence that many aspects of the care and support were based on best practice guidance, such as the recent appointment of infection control champions, whose responsibility was to ensure high standards were maintained by the staff team.
The registered manager had developed an effective system of quality assurance, which measured the outcomes of service provision. Staff, and relatives had been included in this process and their feedback had been used to make improvements to the way the service was provided.