You are here

Archived: 82 Park Street

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 1 November 2011
Date of Publication: 28 November 2011
Inspection Report published 28 November 2011 PDF

Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills (outcome 14)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by competent staff.

How this check was done

Our judgement

People benefit from having members of staff around when they need them. Members of staff are well supported by management. A varied training programme means that members of staff are kept up to date with current good practice in working with people with Autistic Spectrum Condition.

Overall, we found that 82 Park Street was meeting this essential standard.

User experience

Members of staff told us that there must be at least two members of staff on duty over a 24 hour period. At night a member of staff slept while the other stayed awake. The rota showed where people had one to one time with staff. The manager was consulting with staff about changing the current rota system to meet the needs of people better. One benefit was that on some days people could go out on trips without having to get back before staff went off duty.

The service could call on support from members of staff from another service which was within walking distance. There were four other services for people with Autistic Spectrum Condition in Trowbridge. This meant that members of staff could cover shifts when needed in any of the services. No agency staff were used.

We asked members of staff about their induction and training. They told us that they had shadowed a more experienced member of staff at one of the other services for three weeks. They said they had an induction pack which they worked through. Members of staff had had previous experience of working with people with autism and with family members. One member of staff told us that they had trained in Aspergers Syndrome.

The company provided a programme of training for staff. The manager told us that the company’s specialist in Autistic Spectrum Condition was providing training to managers. The manager planned to provide training that linked to each individual person’s complexity. The deputy manager had trained in intensive interaction and provided the training to members of staff. This is a recognised way of working with people who have difficulty communicating, to help them communicate better in their own way.

Members of staff told us about their recent training which included safe handling of medicines, moving and handling and food hygiene. There was e-learning as well as face to face sessions. The manager kept a record of which training members of staff had completed and which needed updating. Specialist outsourced training had included epilepsy and mental health.

One member of staff told us that they were just finishing the Diploma in Health and Social Care. The manager had a degree in supporting people with autism. She told us she was half way through a Bachelors degree in life science.

The manager told us that people were involved in meeting and talking to potential members of staff with staff support. The manager said she took into consideration people’s comments and staff observations of how the candidates interacted with people who used the service.

We asked about staff receiving regular supervision. The manager told us that staff supervision had not taken place as often as she would have liked. She showed us her diary where she had put in each team leader’s supervision sessions for the next few months. The team leaders would then supervise the other members of staff. The manager was undertaking staff appraisals. She told us that she had changed the handover times so that members of staff communicated better and were kept up to date with important things.

Other evidence

An administrator had recently been recruited. The manager said that this meant more time for management and staff to spend with people because they were not involved in office tasks.