Archived: 96 Tomlinson Avenue (Respite Services)

There was 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to the carers on how risks to people could be minimised. There were systems in place to safeguard people from risk of possible harm and suitable equipment was in place so that people were supported safely.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient carers to support people safely. Carers were regularly supported by the registered manager and they had been trained to meet people’s individual needs.

The carers understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care being provided. Where people did not have capacity to consent to their care, this was provided in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People were supported by caring, friendly and respectful carers. They lived with the carers as part of their family members and they benefitted greatly from this kind of service. People were supported to access other health and social care services when required.

People’s needs had been assessed, and care plans took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. They enjoyed happy and fulfilled lives because they had been given opportunities to pursue their hobbies and interests. They also enjoyed holidays of their choice, including going abroad.

The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people who used the service, the carers and people’s relatives. We found they acted on the comments received to improve the quality of the service.

The provider’s quality monitoring processes had been used effectively to drive continuous improvements. People and the carers we spoke with described the service as 'very good'.

We saw that each person received an assessment of their care needs, including any risks associated with their care provision. In all the cases we looked at, we found that the care provided matched with the care required and was what people had agreed to. We found the service had completed the appropriate checks before funded carers began their roles and that they were appropriately trained and qualified.

We saw the service had effective systems to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. These included audits, home visits and surveys. We found there was an effective complaints system available. We saw that people were made aware of the complaints system and it was provided in a format that met their needs.