We carried out a review of the data available to us about Rainbow Trust Children's Charity 6 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 Rainbow Trust Children's Charity 6, you can give feedback on this service.
Rainbow Trust Children's Charity 6 provides personal care and emotional support to children with serious illnesses. This is provided in people's homes, hospitals and in the community. Support workers provide support to both the children and their family members. The service was providing support to 86 children aged from birth to 19 years old and their families. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of this inspection there were four children under the age of 16 who might on occasion require personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found:
Relatives said they were supported by support workers who were kind and caring. Some families had been receiving support from consistent support workers for three to four years, whereas other families had been receiving care and support for shorter periods of time. Relatives told us having the support worker was like an addition to their family.
Children were supported to stay safe as support workers understood their responsibility to report any concerns and follow guidance in place in relation to people’s individual risks. The Trust had a robust assessment process in place alongside its referral criteria. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and support workers supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Support workers understood equality and diversity. Children’s care plans were detailed, and support workers used these to understand the care people required. Care plans had been developed around the needs of the whole family. Children were included within the planning and reviewing of care where this was possible due to age. Families were always included and were always the driving force behind what care and support was required. Children’s privacy and dignity were respected, and their independence promoted.
Relatives told us they were supported and encouraged to participate in events organised by The Rainbow Trust. Relatives told us this was a good opportunity to meet other families and talk to other people going through similar situations. Siblings of children receiving care had taken part in siblings’ days out where they were supported to be develop their own independence and receive support from support workers.
Relatives told us they felt the support provided by the Rainbow Trust had been consistently good and support workers had been flexible and compassionate to meet their needs as a family. Relatives told us they thought highly of the management team. The registered manager was responsive and wanted to improve the service to benefit families who received support now and in the future.
Quality assurance audits were carried out to help ensure the service provided safe and of high quality. Actions identified from these audits were addressed. Children, relatives and professionals were asked for their feedback and this was used to help improve the service. Management and support workers worked alongside other agencies to help improve the support people received.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update:
The last rating for this service was good (published 07 February 2017).
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our reinspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service met all the regulations we inspected on 19 June and 28 June 2013. This service was operating at a different location at that time.
The service has 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 legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Staff demonstrated clear insight to people’s needs and supported families in a holistic way. Assessments were completed so that progress was charted in a way which people and their families could understand. Assessments took place with people and their relatives to ensure personal histories were correctly recorded and used to develop a plan of care. Care was delivered placing the person at the centre and incorporated the needs of their family. Reviews of care occurred frequently and care and support delivered demonstrated flexibility that allowed families to benefit.
People were protected from the risks of harm and abuse. The registered provider had safeguarding processes in place to support staff to keep people safe from the risk of abuse. Staff understood what abuse was and felt confident in discussing safeguarding concerns with the registered manager. The registered manager knew how to report safeguarding concerns with the local authority for their investigation. Staff had processes in place to report their concerns about the service. The whistle-blowing policy provided staff guidance to escalate concerns about the quality of care people received.
Risks to people’s health and well being were identified and managed. Staff delivered care and support that enabled people to take risks while they remained safe. Identified risks were recorded in people’s care records with a risk management plan in place that aimed to reduce the likelihood of those risks.
The registered manager ensured there were enough staff available to support people’s needs. The staff rota detailed each person who required care and the name of the member of staff supporting them. There were systems in place to ensure there were sufficient staff available so people were cared for safely.
The registered provider had processes in place to ensure the safe recruitment of suitable staff. Staff had completed the registered provider’s job application process and had pre-employment checks completed to assess their suitability to support people.
The registered manager supported staff through training, supervision and appraisal. Staff attended regular training which helped them to develop their skills and knowledge to help them support people effectively. During supervision staff were able to gain advice and support from their line manager. Supervision meetings recorded actions taken and were discussed at the next supervision to make sure they were resolved. Staff had a yearly appraisal, which helped them focus and share with their manager their professional and developmental needs.
People’s relatives managed their medicines so staff did not need to do this for people. People’s medicines were managed in a safe way. There were effective systems in place that ordered, stored, delivered and disposed of medicines appropriately. The service had processes in place to ensure people’s medicines were managed safely should the need arise.
The registered manager and staff had an awareness of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People or their relatives were supported to consent to care, support and treatment. Information was presented to people in a way that they understood. This enabled people and their relatives to make decisions and choices about the care they received.
People's nutritional needs were met according to their needs and preferences. Staff understood people’s specific nutritional needs and the support they required meet them. People’s favourite meals were known by staff who provided them when they wanted. Staff sought healthcare advice and support for people when their health care needs changed. People’s healthcare needs were known by staff, who were able to detect when these changed. Staff took prompt action to request healthcare advice to manage these changes.
Staff treated people and their relatives in a way that demonstrated kindness and compassion. People told us staff respected their privacy and dignity. Care and support was delivered in a person centred that respected people’s end of life choices. Staff cared and supported people in such a way that demonstrated they mattered. People’s needs, wishes, likes and dislikes were known by staff and used to ensure their care and support was appropriate. People were able to make a complaint about the care they received because there was a complaint policy and process in place.
People gave their feedback on the quality of care and the registered manager routinely carried out audits of the service. Staff told us that they enjoyed working for the organisation because their views were listened and they felt valued. The registered manager understood their responsibilities with the Care Quality Commission.