We carried out a review of the data available to us about Crossroads Care West Berkshire on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Crossroads Care West Berkshire, you can give feedback on this service.
This inspection took place on 11 December 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider prior notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to make sure someone would be in the office. At the time of our inspection the service was providing personal care to 43 people.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
Why the service is rated Good.
People felt safe while supported by the staff team who made them feel reassured and relatives agreed with this. Staff had a good understanding of how to keep people safe and their responsibilities for reporting accidents, incidents or concerns. The registered manager had the knowledge to identify safeguarding concerns and acted on these appropriately.
The registered manager and senior staff had planned and booked training when necessary to ensure all staff had the appropriate knowledge and skills to support people. Staff had ongoing support, supervision and appraisals. They felt really supported by the registered manager and senior staff, and maintained good team work.
People and relatives were complimentary of the staff and the support and care they provided. People received support that was individualised to their specific needs which were kept under review and amended as changes occurred. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People were treated with respect, and their privacy and dignity were promoted. People felt the staff supported them in the way they wanted. Staff were responsive to the needs of the people and enabled them to improve and maintain their independence with personal care. The staff monitored people's health and wellbeing and took appropriate action when required to address concerns. People felt confident they would be looked after well and relatives agreed with them.
Where possible, the registered manager scheduled visits so the same staff went to see people to maintain continuity of care and support. People were informed about the changes to their visits as necessary. The service assessed risks to people's personal safety, as well as staff, and plans were in place to minimise those risks. There were safe medicines administration systems in place and people received their medicines when required. The service had recruitment procedure that they followed before new staff were employed to work with people. This included ensuring staff were of good character and suitable for their role.
Staff felt the registered manager and senior staff were approachable and considerate. They had good communication, worked well together and supported each other, which benefitted the people who use the service. The registered manager had quality assurance systems in place to monitor the running of the service and the quality of the service being delivered. The registered manager and the senior team were able to identify issues and improvements necessary and took actions promptly to address these. They praised the staff team for their hard work and appreciated their contribution to ensure people received the best care and support.
The inspection was carried out on 29 January 2016. The provider had been given 48 hours’ notice of the inspection to ensure the people concerned could be contacted in person. The service had last been inspected on 19June 2013 and had been found to be meeting all the assessed standards.
Crossroads Care West Berkshire is a domiciliary care service providing support to people with learning disabilities in the Newbury and Reading area. About 140 people were being supported by the agency on the date of the inspection.
The service had a manager who had been working in this position for four weeks. The manager was going through the registration process with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to become registered. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 told us they felt safe and were well-supported by the agency. All staff received training in safeguarding adults. There were clear policies and procedures in place to support staff if any concerns were raised.
Risk assessments clearly identified risks and gave staff guidance on how to minimise those risks. The assessments were designed to keep people and staff safe whilst allowing people to develop and maintain their independence.
People who use the service and their relatives spoke highly of the service in terms of its organisation and management. People described staff supporting them as reliable. Moreover, staff rota was effectively organised to meet people's needs.
Where people needed assistance in taking their medicine, this was administered in a timely manner by staff who had been trained to carry out this role. If needed, staff liaised with healthcare professionals immediately to help monitor and maintain people’s health and well-being.
At our inspection we found that the provider was working within the principles of the MCA where it was necessary and appropriate to the needs of people they supported. The MCA (Mental Capacity Act 2005) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that as far as possible people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to make particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.
Assessments were undertaken to identify people’s support needs and care plans were developed outlining how these needs were to be met. We found that care plans were detailed, which enabled staff to provide the individualised care people needed. People told us they were involved in developing their care plans. They were also consulted about the way their care was delivered to ensure their wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment.
People received personalised care and support that met their needs and took account of their preferences. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s backgrounds, life histories, preferences and routines.
A complaints procedure was in place, enabling people to raise their concerns at any time. Each person was given a copy of the agency’s complaint procedures. People said they were confident that their concerns would be handled appropriately end efficiently.
Staff told us they enjoyed their work and were well-supported by the management through supervision, appraisals and training. The manager spoke highly of the staff team, describing them as “committed and enthusiastic in their approach to their work”.
We found that the service offered people care that was greatly valued by the people who used it. The carers told us that they and the person they cared for were always treated with the greatest respect. People told us it was ''an incredibly flexible service''. They said it ''lifted a weight off my shoulders knowing that if I were taken ill or had an emergency Crossroads would help out''.
We found that the service worked with other agencies to ensure people had the best care that suited their needs. People told us that the service always explained to them where they could find additional help, should they need it.
We saw that the service checked prospective staff so that they could be as sure as possible that they were safe and suitable people to provide care. People described staff as ''absolutely fantastic''. They told us that they always felt ''safe and comfortable with the care staff who come to my home''.
We saw that the service had effective ways of checking the standard of care they offered. People told us they had ''absolutely no concerns or worries'' about the service. They described the quality of the care they received as ''excellent''.
The carers told us that they and the person they cared for were treated with respect and given a service in the way they preferred. They told us that they were very satisfied with the service they received, some people described it as ''brilliant''. People told us that they were confident that the care workers were safe, honest and trustworthy. They said that they were comfortable and confident when the care workers were in their homes. People told us that the staff were ''excellent'' and always treated them very well. Some people told us that the care workers were like ''part of the family''. Carers told us that they were confident that the care workers were safe and they were comfortable and confident with them in their homes. People told us that they had no complaints at all about the service.