The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: 9 Red Barn Mews

9 Red Barn Mews, High Street, Battle, East Sussex, TN33 0AG

Provided and run by:
ASD Unique Services LLP

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

16 January 2014

During a routine inspection

This service offered support to people whose needs were within the autistic spectrum. This often meant that people they worked with found it difficult to engage with others and were unwilling to participate in surveys or speak with strangers.

At the time of our visit one person living in their own tenancy was supported. Their anxiety meant they had established a fragile rapport with a limited number of staff. They were unwilling to provide feedback and the service respected this. However, we were able to speak to staff that supported them.

Care records showed that the service had developed a comprehensive understanding of the person supported. They could demonstrate progress made albeit slowly and at a pace suited to the person.

The manager and staff confirmed that appropriate systems were in place for the supervision, appraisal and training of staff involved in the outreach service. This ensured that they had the appropriate skills to support people and we viewed records to support this.

People were informed about the complaints process, we saw that there was a complaints log but no complaints had been received. The manager said that minor concerns were addressed as they arose, to reduce the need for these to escalate to more serious concerns.

The records of staff and people supported were updated and kept securely. A system was in place for the archiving and destruction of older records.

13 December 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We previously visited this service on 8 October 2012. We found that there was no established system to monitor and record service quality.

We asked the provider to send us an action plan of how and within what timescale they intended to make the necessary improvements, which they have done.

At our last visit people supported by the service made clear that they did not want to be involved in the inspection or talk with us about the service they received. We have continued to respect that decision.

At this visit we spoke with the manager and reviewed documentation and records. We were satisfied that the service had formalised the quality monitoring process and actions highlighted were acted upon. They had done this by developing systems for recording audits and checks made, and had established a frequency to how often this happened. They had also introduced a way in which people who used the service were specifically asked for their views about the service they received.

8 October 2012

During a routine inspection

This service offered support to people whose needs were within the autistic spectrum. Because of the heightened anxieties of the people that were supported, we asked staff if they would check with them to see whether they would be willing to speak with us. Staff reported back that people had said they did not wish us to contact them. We asked staff whether people would be willing to write something about their experience of the service. Staff contacted people receiving the service about this and reported back that none of the people they supported wished to write any comments. Staff also reported back that the people they supported did not wish us to contact their relatives about the service they received and we have respected their decision. Therefore we reviewed records and spoke with staff about the service.

We found that people using the service were supported to be independent by well trained staff. However, processes that monitored the quality of the service were absent.