You are here

Community Crisis Support Service Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

We are carrying out a review of quality at Community Crisis Support Service. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 March 2017

We carried out an announced inspection of the service on 20 December 2916

Red Cross Crisis Intervention Community Support provides short term personal care and support to people in the Nottingham area. There were 14 people receiving care in their own homes at the time of our visit.

There was not a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 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 previous inspection on 15 July 2015 we identified one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. These were in relation to risks associated with managing medicines, because the processes in place were not robust or followed safely to ensure medicines were handled and administered safely.

During this inspection we checked to see whether improvements had been made. We found improvements had been made in regards to the breach identified at our last inspection. An action plan was in place to fully complete the action required that would ensure sustainability.

People told us they felt safe when staff supported them within their home. People were supported by staff who could identify the different types of abuse and who to report concerns to. Assessments of the risks to people’s safety were in place and regularly reviewed.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff in place to keep people safe. Safe recruitment processes were in place.

People were protected from the risks associated with managing medicines. There were processes in place to ensure medicines were handled and administered safely.

Staff received training, regular supervision and felt supported by the management team. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were considered when supporting people. People were supported and encouraged to follow a healthy and balanced diet. People’s day to day health needs were met effectively by the staff.

People felt the staff were kind and caring and treated them with respect and dignity. People were involved with decisions made about their care and support. Information was available for people if they wished to speak with an independent advocate. People were supported to live independently.

People knew how to raise any concerns and they knew who they should contact and raise the concern with. The provider followed their procedures to ensure any complaints or concerns were dealt with in a timely manner.

People, relatives and staff spoke highly of the service. A number of systems were in place that enabled people, staff and relatives to give their views about the service. Robust quality assurance processes were in place.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 March 2017

The service was safe.

Medicines were managed well and there were assurances that people were receiving them as prescribed.

People told us they felt safe when staff supported them within their home.

Assessments of the risks to people’s safety were in place and regularly reviewed.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff in place to keep people safe. Safe recruitment processes were in place.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 March 2017

The service was effective.

People received care from staff who were trained, received regular supervision and felt supported by the registered manager

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were considered when supporting people.

People were supported to have sufficient to eat and drink.

People’s day to day health needs were met by staff who were knowledgeable and understood how to meet the needs of the people they cared for. Referrals were made to other healthcare professionals when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 March 2017

The service was caring.

People gave positive feedback about the kindness and compassion of the staff.

People were treated with respect, compassion and in a dignified way at all times by the staff who cared for them.

People were involved with decisions made about their care and support.

Information was available for people if they wished to speak with an independent advocate.

People were supported to live independently.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 March 2017

The service was responsive.

People’s support records were person centred, focussed on what was important to each person and provided staff with relevant information to respond to people’s needs.

Complaints and concerns were managed in line with company policy.

The provider responded quickly and professionally.

People’s care plans were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they received personal care relevant to them.

Well-led

Good

Updated 24 March 2017

The service was well-led.

Procedures were place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

A number of systems were in place that enabled a wide range of people, staff and relatives to give their views about the service.

There was no registered manager, but the provider had taken steps to address this.

There were plans in place for emergency situations. The manager and on call staff were contactable over a 24 hours period to ensure staff and people who used the service were fully supported.