Archived: Newcross Healthcare Solutions Limited (Torbay & South Hams Service)

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

People received a safe service that met their complex healthcare needs. Risks associated with people’s health conditions were assessed and regularly reviewed. Management plans guided staff about how to mitigate risks and what action to take in an emergency.

Relatives praised the service for the compassion, care and friendship the service had brought to their relative’s lives. The service wad able to demonstrate their commitment to ensure people received the best possible care. Relatives said people’s health, well-being and quality of life had improved since receiving support from Newcross. One relative said, “They’re like an extended family. My daughter feels really comfortable with them.” Another described staff as "excellent" and "irreplaceable".

Staff were safely recruited and well trained in the complex healthcare needs of the people they supported. Staff said the service provided very good training and their standards were high. Relatives told us they felt staff were competent and safe. Supervisions and regular competency assessments ensured staff were well supported, knowledgeable about people’s care needs, and their practice remained safe. Relatives and staff said they would recommend the service to other people.

The management team and staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people and to be honest and open when things had gone wrong. Complaints were recorded, investigated and kept under review. People, relatives and staff said they felt listened to and respected.

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 supported to engage in hobbies and interest in the local community.

Care plans were personalised and detailed, providing staff with the guidance they required to provide safe and consistent care that met people’s preferences and expectations. Regular reviews ensured people’s care needs were well understood and care plans contained up to date information.

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 1 March 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.

A registered manager was employed to manage the service locally. 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.

People and their relatives described staff as extremely caring and going the extra mile to help ensure their wellbeing was maintained. Relatives (particularly parents) of people who used the service described how staff forming strong bonds with their loved ones and understanding their needs helped them trust staff to provide care. Comments included, “The most positive thing is the bond of trust because I’ve seen how the carers interact with my daughter and how loving they are.”

The registered manager explained the ethos of the organisation was to treat people as individuals. It was clear from the way staff spoke about people they supported that they had adopted this in their way of working. Staff told us they valued their relationships with people and spoke in a way that showed they cared deeply for them. Comments included, “I work with […] and they’re just a delight. Everybody loves her!” and “I love my job. I enjoy going in to see people. I work with children. It’s a privilege to see people growing up”

Staff took time to understand and learn people’s individual communication methods and used these to help ensure people were able to express their views and fulfil their potential by offering personalised support. Where people could not express their views easily, staff acted as their advocates. A staff member explained, “For people who can’t speak for themselves, we’re their voice.”

People told us they felt safe using the service. Comments from relatives included, “The best thing is the security. I feel secure that when I leave here I know that my girl is as safe as she can be.” Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse and were confident any allegations would be taken seriously and investigated to help ensure people were protected. The recruitment process of new staff was robust and people who used the service met new staff to check they would be happy to receive care from them.

There was a positive culture within the service. Staff told us they enjoyed working for Newcross and received all the support they needed to carry out their roles effectively. Staff training was updated regularly and included mandatory training as well as specific training to meet people’s needs. People received support from staff who knew them well, and had the knowledge and skills to meet their needs. People and their relatives spoke highly of the staff and the support provided. Comments included, “The carers are very well trained, very responsible, helpful and friendly.”

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and ensured they gained consent before providing care to people. Staff also ensured people were given choice and control over their lives and gave people explanations about care being delivered. People’s individual communication methods had been learned by staff to help ensure people’s opinions were heard and respected.

There was a management structure in the service which provided clear lines of responsibility and accountability. A registered manager was in post who had overall responsibility for the service. They were supported by other senior staff who had designated management responsibilities. The registered manager also told us the providers were very involved with the organisation and maintaining the quality of the service.

The manager and staff monitored the quality of the service by regularly undertaking a range of regular audits and speaking with people to ensure they were happy with the service they received. Information from feedback and audits were used to aid learning and drive improvement across the service and the organisation.

We spoke with eleven people who used the service and five people's representatives. We spoke with the acting manager, two higher managers from the provider's team, five support workers and two healthcare professionals.

People who used the service told us they were happy with the service and that the support workers met their needs appropriately. They felt they were treated respectfully and with dignity. Comments included 'they are very good, they have exceeded my expectations'.

People were included in the writing of comprehensive care plans and assessments. These directed support workers to give safe and appropriate care. We were told, 'I was asked lots of questions and what I needed and I have been very satisfied with the help I get'.

The service had sufficient skilled and experienced nurses and support workers employed to meet people's needs. They had received appropriate training and professional development.

People told us they were happy with the service. However the service had not formally asked people who use the service and their representatives their views for 18 months. We were told that a new survey was going to be sent out.

People told us that their consent was always sought before they received any care or treatment and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. People told us that care workers were polite and respectful.

Risks to people's health and welfare had been identified and plans were in place to protect people from these risks.

People told us that they felt safe and at ease whilst care was being delivered and that care workers respected their belongings and property. People confirmed they had been given the service's contact details and sufficient information about the service.

We saw that background checks on staff had been undertaken prior to them being employed. These included reference checks, Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks and copies of documents which provided proof of their identity.

We saw that quality assurance systems were in place which enabled the provider to monitor the quality of care.