Archived: Cornwall Care Respite Services

Updated 24 February 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 of the service under the Care Act 2014.

This was an unannounced inspection which took place on the 10th November 2014.The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR) and this was returned before the inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. Before the inspection, we reviewed information included in the PIR along with information we held about the service. This included notifications, any complaints or safeguarding issues. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

During the inspection we spoke with the interim manager, team leader and three staff members. Following the inspection we received information we requested from a member of the Cornwall Care governance team. Prior to and following the inspection we spoke with two professionals working outside the organisation. They included health and social care workers. We spoke with three people using the service and used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We talked with a relative during the inspection.

Updated 24 February 2015

Cornwall Care Respite also known as The Bungalow provides residential support for short breaks and day care for adults with a range of learning disabilities. This includes but is not exclusive of autism, sensory impairment and physical disability.

The service is designed to accommodate people with a range of disabilities. Some rooms have en-suite facilities including ‘wet areas’ for people whose disability means access to bathing is limited. In addition the service has a range of equipment specifically designed for people with physical and mobility issues.

When we undertook the inspection the home did not have a registered manager in post. 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. The registered manager post was vacant and the deputy manager was running the service. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) had been informed of the management situation and the commission had been notified of the actions the organisation was taking to meet the homes conditions of registration.

We saw the people using the respite services of The Bungalow were being supported by caring and respectful staff. For example one person told us, “I have used a lot of services for the person, but by far this is the best. The staff are so very caring”. People visiting during the inspection were made to feel welcome by staff and those using the service that day. The atmosphere was inclusive, with people moving around the building without restriction. People were laughing and smiling. Staff were assisting them to engage in a range of activities of their choice. Peoples preferred method of communication was taken into account and respected.

Staff working at The Bungalow understood the needs of people they were caring for and supporting. One person said, It’s a lovely job and very rewarding. As it’s a small service we get to know the needs of people really well. We also support families because that’s needed as well”. A relative told us, “Staff tell me if anything has changed. They are always warm and friendly”.

Staff were able to describe how people were protected from the risk of abuse. The service had safeguards in place for people who may not have had the capacity to make decisions about their care, support and safety.

Staffing levels were sufficient to provide the support people required. We saw staff had time to spend with people in a way which was unhurried and personal to them. Where people needed individual support this was provided. One person told us, “The way we work is really flexible and as we work as a team we help each other out because it can be very intense sometimes”.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. They said they had received a good induction to introduce them into their roles. One person said, “I felt much more confident to do the job after my induction. It was very good”. Training opportunities meant staff had the competencies and skills to meet the responsibilities of care and support.

The premises were well maintained, designed and equipped to support people with a range of disabilities and mobility issues. There were enough areas for people to take part in activities or spend time on their own.

Staff told us they felt valued by managers and supported in their roles. One person said, “It’s a pleasure to come to work. We all work as one team and the manager’s door is always open”.

The governance manager and interim manager worked closely together to monitor and evaluate care and support. They used information gained from people using the service, relatives and external professionals to improve the service.