Archived: Barnardo's Indigo Project

Updated 10 May 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 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 took place on 23 February 2017 and was announced. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.

Before the inspection, we reviewed previous inspection reports, information received from external stakeholders and statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

During the inspection we spoke with one relative, 2 members of staff, the registered manager and the operations manager of the service. We looked at three care plans and two staff records. We also looked at a range of records relating to how the service was managed and policies and procedures.

Updated 10 May 2017

This unannounced inspection took place on 23 February 2017.

Barnardo’s Indigo Project provides respite care for children and young people with learning disabilities in their own homes. The level of support provided ranges from daily support or weekly assistance as per individually agreed care packages.

The service has 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection in November 2015, we found two breaches of the regulations. Sufficient systems were not in place to show how the registered manager monitored the quality of the service provided to the children/young people. Risks relating to children and young people's care and support and how to mitigate these were not always appropriately assessed.

At this inspection, we found improvements had been made and that the service now met the required standards.

Referrals for the service were received via the London Borough of Redbridge children with disabilities team. The care package was agreed by a panel of professionals. The service’s manager then carried out an assessment of the child/young person’s needs prior to allocating suitable staff to provide respite care.

Staff were caring and treated children/young people with dignity and respect. Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and its application for young people aged 16 and over, who used the service.

Systems were in place to manage risks to children/young people and staff. Children and young people were safe at the service and were cared for by staff who were knowledgeable about safeguarding children and young people. They knew how to report concerns.

The recruitment process was robust to make sure that the right staff were recruited to keep children and young people safe. Staff confirmed and personnel records showed that appropriate checks were carried out before they began working at the service.

Children and young people received the care they needed. Care plans were person centred and were reviewed and updated when needs changed.

Family members told us that the staff were kind and polite. They said the staff were punctual and stayed the duration of their allocated time.

Medicines were managed by family members, however staff were aware of the procedure to follow should they be occasionally required to administer medicines. They were trained and assessed as competent to administer medicines.

Staff were supported by the registered manager, through regular supervision and received an annual appraisal of their practice and performance.

There were sufficient qualified and experienced staff to meet children and young people’s needs. Staff received the support and training they needed to provide an effective service that met children and young people’s needs.

The children and young people were provided with meaningful and individualised activities and outings. The outings were developed over time in conjunction with the child/ young person and their family member.

A pictorial complaints procedure was available. Children and young people and their relatives were aware of the complaints procedure and knew who to speak with if they had any concerns.

Systems were in place to evaluate and monitor the quality of the service in order to make continuous improvements.