Archived: Crossroads Care North West - Chorley & South Ribble

This inspection took place on the 7 & 8 April 2016 and was announced. The registered manager was given 48 hours’ notice prior to the inspection, so that we could be sure they would be available to provide us with the information we required.

We last inspected this service under its previously registered name of ‘Chorley and South Ribble Crossroads Care’ in February 2014. The service was judged to be compliant in all the areas we looked at.

The registered manager of the service was present throughout our inspection. 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.

We looked at recruitment processes and found the service had recruitment policies and procedures in place to help ensure safety in the recruitment of staff. People told us the service was reliable.

Staff we spoke with told us they were given enough time with people, were given time for travelling and that visits to people did not overlap. People we spoke with told us that staff stayed for the allocated time and on and on many occasions stayed over to assist the people they supported .

We looked at assessments undertaken for four people before the agency agreed to provide their domiciliary care package and found that safety checks and risk assessments were undertaken. We found that care plans identified risk management in a person centred way.

We looked at how people were protected from bullying, harassment, avoidable harm and abuse. We found that the service followed safeguarding reporting systems, as outlined in its policies and procedures. People over whelmingly told us they were safe.

We found that the service promoted staff development and had a rolling programme to ensure that staff received training appropriate to their role and responsibilities. Staff told us they felt well supported by management and we saw evidence that regular supervisions were being held.

We looked at how the service gained people’s consent to care and treatment in line with the Mental Capacity Act [MCA]. We looked at people's care records and found comprehensive mental capacity assessments, with supporting best interests decisions where needed.

Care records held details of joint working with health and social care professionals involved with people, who accessed the service.

We received consistent positive feedback about the staff and about the care that people received. Staff received training to help ensure they understood how to respect people’s privacy, dignity and

rights. People told us how their relatives were given time during care visits to develop relationships with care staff which meant stable and settled care for people who used the service.

We found that people's needs were being met in a person centred manner and reflected their personal preferences. The manager advised us that staff were always introduced to service users, prior to any support being provided. This helped to ensure people received their care from staff they were familiar with.

There were clear assessment processes in place, which helped to ensure staff had a good understanding of people's needs before they started to support them. People were supported by staff to access the community and minimise the risk of becoming socially isolated. People’s care was delivered in a way that took account of their needs and the support they required to live independently at home.

Staff and people who used the service told us that the management team were approachable. We found the registered manager was familiar with people who used the service and their needs. When we discussed people's needs the manager showed good knowledge about the people in her care.

We looked at staff meeting minutes, they showed staff were involved in discussions about improving the service and management input was motivating to encourage the staff team to provide good standards of care and support.

We found that the service had a robust quality auditing system in place. The provider carried out audits to monitor the quality of the service. We found the registered manager receptive to feedback and keen to improve the service. They worked with us in a positive manner providing all the information we requested.