Archived: Harbourne

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, their relatives, staff supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff we spoke with understood how to safeguard the people they supported.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care.

People's needs were taken into account with signage and the layout of the service enabling people to move around freely and safely.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly.

People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. People told us they had never needed to make a complaint but if they did they thought complaints would be investigated and action taken as necessary.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

Staff had attended several training courses which took into account the needs of the people who used the service. This ensured that people's needs were met.

People's needs were assessed and care, treatment and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. The care plans contained a good level of information setting out exactly how each person should be supported to ensure that their needs were met. One person told us, 'I like it here, we are well looked after.' Another person said, 'So far it is alright.'

We observed people were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment. There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. The people we spoke with told us they had no concerns with the cleanliness of the home.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This included carrying out a Criminal Bureau Records check and obtaining written references.

The provider obtained feedback from people about their care, support and treatment. There were quality monitoring programmes in place; however, some audits had not been completed for some time.

The relatives we spoke with told us that they had no concerns at all about the standard of care provided at the home and always found the staff to be professional in their approach to providing care and support. One person said 'Although I have only visited a few times I am always made to feel very welcome and staff always find time to answer any questions I might have.' Another person said 'Due to unforeseen circumstances my relatives respite care placement was arranged very quickly and we were worried if they would accept residential care. However, they have enjoyed every minute of their stay.'

During the visit we spoke with two visiting healthcare professionals. They told us that they had no concerns about the standard of care provided at the home and that staff had a good understanding of people's needs.