Archived: Respite (North West) - Heywood

Updated 6 July 2016

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

This was an unannounced inspection and was conducted by one inspector on the 01 June 2016.

Before our inspection visit we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included notifications the provider had made to us.

We did not request a Provider Information Return (PIR) because the provider would not have had sufficient time to complete it. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we talked with two people who used the service, two relatives, two care staff members, a manager and the registered manager.

There were 21 people who used the service on the day of the inspection. During our inspection we observed the support provided by staff in communal areas of the home. We looked at the care records for five people who used the service and medication administration records for eight people. We also looked at the recruitment, training and supervision records for three members of staff, minutes of meetings and a variety of other records related to the management of the service.

Updated 6 July 2016

Respite (North West) Heywood provides care to people who live in their own homes. People receiving support have a wide range of support needs, with the largest client group having learning disabilities.

The service were last inspected in August 2014 when they met all the regulations we inspected.

We undertook this comprehensive unannounced inspection on 07 and 08 June 2016, which was conducted by one inspector.

The service 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People who used the service and family members said they felt safe. Staff we spoke with were aware of how to protect vulnerable people and had safeguarding policies and procedures to guide them which included the contact details of the local authority to report to.

Recruitment procedures were robust and ensured new staff should be safe to work with vulnerable adults.

The administration of medicines was safe. Staff had been trained in the administration of medicines and had up to date policies and procedures to follow. Their competency was checked regularly.

People who used the service told us the food was good. They were involved in planning their menus and shopping for food. People were encouraged to assist with any tasks they could to help them remain independent.

The office was well equipped to provide a good service and was maintained to a good standard. We also saw evidence the houses people lived in had systems to check they were safe.

There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection. Staff were trained in infection control and provided with the necessary equipment and hand washing facilities to help protect their health and welfare.

Most staff had been trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Although people who live in their own homes do not usually require a DoLS a manager told us social services were looking at the mental capacity of people in supported living to ensure it was in their best interests to do so.

New staff received induction training to provide them with the skills to care for people. Staff files and the training matrix showed staff had undertaken sufficient training to meet the needs of people and they were supervised regularly to check their competence. Supervision sessions also gave staff the opportunity to discuss their work and ask for any training they felt necessary.

We observed there were good interactions between staff and people who used the service. People told us staff were kind, knowledgeable and caring.

We saw people had the opportunity to attend meaningful activities and were also supported to remain as independent as possible by being taught skills such as shopping and menu planning.

We saw that the quality of care plans gave staff sufficient information to look after people accommodated at the care home and they were regularly reviewed. Plans of care contained people’s personal preferences so they could be treated as individuals.

There was a record kept of any complaints and we saw the manager took action to investigate any concerns, incidents or accidents to reach satisfactory outcomes. There had not been any complaints since the last inspection.

Staff and people who used the service told us managers were approachable and supportive.

Staff meetings gave staff the opportunity to be involved in the running of the home and discuss their training needs.

The manager conducted sufficient audits to ensure the quality of the service provided was maintained or improved.