Archived: Hartleys Care

Hartleys Care provides respite care for up to four people with learning disabilities. On the day of the inspection two people were receiving care services from the provider. The home 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.

During our visit to the service we looked at the care records for four people and looked at records that related to how the service was managed.

People who used this service were safe. The care staff knew how to identify if a person may be at risk of harm and the action to take if they had concerns about a person’s safety.

The care staff knew the people they were supporting and the choices they had made about their care and their lives. People who used the service, and those who were important to them, were included in planning and agreeing to the care provided.

The decisions people made were respected. People were supported to maintain their independence and control over their lives. People received care from a team of staff who they knew and who knew them.

We observed that people were treated with kindness and respect.

The registered manager used safe recruitment systems to ensure that new staff were only employed if they were suitable to work in people’s homes. The staff employed by the service were aware of their responsibility to protect people from harm or abuse. They told us they would be confident reporting any concerns to a senior person in the service or to the local authority or CQC.

There were sufficient staff, with appropriate experience, training and skills to meet people’s needs. The service was well managed and took appropriate action if expected standards were not met. This ensured people received a safe service that promoted their rights and independence.

Staff were well supported through a system of induction, training, supervision, appraisal and professional development. There was a positive culture within the service which was demonstrated by the attitudes of staff when we spoke with them and their approach to supporting people to maintain their independence.

The service was well-led. There was a comprehensive, formal quality assurance process in place. This meant that all aspects of the service were formally monitored to ensure good care was provided and planned improvements and changes were implemented in a timely manner.

There were good systems in place for care staff or others to raise any concerns with the registered manager.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with five people using the service, three relatives, and the staff supporting them and looking at records.

If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People are treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe. One person we spoke with said, 'I like to come here, I get well looked after and we go out and do lots of things that I like.' We spoke with two parents and they said their relative would tell them straight away if they were not happy with the service.

Systems were in place to make sure that the manager and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduces the risks to people and helps the service to continually improve.

The manager told us that she had attended training to ensure she understood her responsibilities to keep people safe during their stay at the home. Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place if required.

Equipment was well maintained and serviced regularly therefore not putting people at unnecessary risk. The home was clean and fresh and the manger showed us examples that confirmed good systems were in place to manage the risk of infection.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. People said that they had been involved in writing them and they reflected their current needs. Parents we spoke with told us they always spent time talking to the manager when they collected their relative after their stay at the home. This gave them an opportunity to talk about the care needs of their relative.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that the manager and her one member of staff showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting the person who used the service. People we spoke with said, 'I like to come here, we get to do lots of things like bowling and going out for a meal.' Relative's we spoke with told us they thought the care was good and staff made sure they (the relative) were kept informed about the care given to their relative.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes. For example, staff ensured they provided halal meat for one person when they stayed at the home. This ensured they met their cultural and religious needs.

Is the service responsive?

The manager told us that the service is built around the needs of people who used the service. She told us menus and activities were planned at the end of each stay so that the person knew what activities and meals they would be having during their stay.

Parents we spoke with knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. One parent said, 'I have absolutely no concerns we are kept informed and if there was a problem it would be sorted quickly.'

Is the service well-led?

The service only provides short respite stays therefore there is only a very small staff group. The manager and her sister worked at the home and they provided a person centred service. It was clear that they worked very hard to ensure people enjoyed their stay at the home. Activities and meals were tailored to meet the needs of the people who used the service.

We found people were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement. One person told us 'I like to go to the gym and for walks around Rother Valley country park.' We also go shopping and I can choose what we are going to eat for our dinner.'

Throughout our visit, we saw that staff treated people with dignity and kindness. We observed that a friendly and positive approach was used to ensure that the wishes and needs of people using the service were respected.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work.

The provider had processes in place to monitor people's views about the service offered. Parents we spoke with told us they had never had cause to complain about the service there relative had received. We found that the provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of service that people received.