Archived: Chailey Heritage Pathways

Chailey Heritage Pathways is a domiciliary care agency providing support to five people. Personal care was provided to three young people living with complex and multiple disabilities at the time of the inspection.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were supported safely by a staff team who understood how to identify and report any concerns about people’s safety or wellbeing. Risks were recognised and assessed. There were enough staff available to support people as planned. However, some people wanted more care visits to be provided by the service and staff recruitment was taking place to be able to provide these. Medicines were managed safely. Infection prevention and control was well managed. When things went wrong, lessons were learnt and ways to reduce the risk of reoccurrence were implemented.

People’s needs and choices were assessed before they started using the service. Staff worked with people, their families and other professionals to understand people’s needs. Staff were supported with induction, training and supervision to ensure they had the right skills to support people. People were supported to live healthy lives.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were treated with kindness and care. People were supported to make decisions about their day to day care and support. People’s independence was promoted. People’s privacy and dignity was respected.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and had shared interests. Care plans were regularly reviewed to ensure they received the right support. People were supported to follow their interests and their communication needs were assessed and understood by staff. Complaints were well managed.

The service had a positive and person-centred culture. Staff were proud to work there. Staff felt well supported by the nominated individual and their colleagues. A quality assurance framework supported the continuous improvement of the service. People’s families were engaged with for feedback and action was taken to improve the service. Staff worked in partnership with other professionals.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 21 September 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Chailey Heritage Pathways is a domiciliary care agency providing inclusion support to six people living in their own homes, all of whom received support with their personal care needs, the service's regulated activity. The service provides tailored support packages to children and younger adults with profound learning and physical disabilities in East Sussex.

The service had 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

A robust quality assurance framework was not yet in place. Systems to monitor the administration of medicines and call calls were not consistently robust and not all shortfalls had been identified. People’s care plans did not match the care plans held in their own homes which meant the provider was unable to monitor compliance with specific protocols such as epilepsy protocols. This is an area of practice in need of improvement.

People were supported by care workers who were highly motivated, kind, compassionate and caring and enjoyed their work. Care workers were adept at maintaining the dignity of people they supported with personal care and accessing other professionals when necessary.

People and their relatives received a service which was responsive to their individual needs and was flexible. Management asked relatives how they could support them and packages of care were implemented which ranged from taking people out to supporting with accessing healthcare appointments. Relatives confirmed they could be flexible with how care was delivered and advised that during school holidays they could easily increase the package of care. Relatives we spoke with felt able to complain although they had not had cause to. The service had a complaints procedure in place but had not received any complaints. They had received compliments and letters of thanks.

The registered manager promoted a positive culture that was open, inclusive and empowering. Staff felt supported by the registered manager and were able to give their views on the service as well as suggest any improvements.

Relatives told us care workers were respectful and treated people with dignity, kindness and respect. They told us care staff went above and beyond to ensure they were happy and well. People's privacy was maintained. Care workers had a firm understanding of respecting people within their own home and providing them with choice and control. Relatives praised the service and the calibre of care workers. One relative told us, “They are all amazing, they are professional and only have to be told once how to do something, they clearly have very good training."

People were protected from abuse because the provider had systems in place to ensure checks of new staffs characters and suitability to work with adults and children at risk were carried out. Staff had also received training in child and adult safeguarding. Care workers understood the principles of consent and training records confirmed care workers had received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and consent.

Care workers were very experienced and effective in their roles and this was confirmed by relatives. The provider had an induction programme available which was based on the Care Certificate and offered a range of relevant training which staff found useful. Care workers had received training that was specific to the needs of people they supported. The provider had employed a nurse consultant who was working alongside care workers to assess their competency and provide clinical supervision.