Archived: The Colebrook Centre

Updated 21 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 checked 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 inspection took place on 8 June 2015. This inspection was announced. We gave 48 hours short notice of our inspection because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that staff and people would be available when we visited. When planning the inspection visit we took account the size of the service and as a result this inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports and statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which providers are required to notify us by law. We did not request a Provider Information Return (PIR) before our visit. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make. We obtained this information during the inspection.

Following the inspection we spoke with two social workers from the local authority about the service.

We spoke with the person who received personal care. We spoke with the registered manager and two members of staff. After the inspection we telephoned the relatives of the person receiving personal care. We also reviewed the person’s care records and medicines administration records. During the inspection visit we reviewed a range of records including two staff files, agency worker profiles, policies, quality monitoring audits and other records relating to the management of the service

This service was last inspected in May 2013 where no concerns were identified.

Updated 21 July 2016

This inspection took place on the 8 June 2016 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection because it is a small domiciliary care service and the registered manager is not always based on site. We needed to be sure they would be in. The Colebrook Centre is a community based adult social care service that provides care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there was one person receiving personal care (the regulated activity). The office is located in the town centre of Winchester.

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

The person who used the service and their relatives told us they were cared for safely. Staff had completed training in safeguarding people from abuse and records showed any concerns raised were acted on appropriately. Staff understood how to report any concerns and were aware of how to protect people from the risk of abuse.

Risk management plans provided guidance for staff on supporting people safely and minimising risks to them and others. Other health and social care professionals were involved in supporting staff and people to manage risks so that people were cared for safely and appropriately.

There were enough staff available to meet the person’s needs and care for them safely. Agency staff were used to cover staff vacancies and wherever possible the same agency staff were used to provide consistency of care. The person told us they were satisfied with the staffing arrangements. The provider carried out the required pre-employment checks to protect people from the employment of unsuitable staff.

The person’s medicines were managed safely. Staff were trained and assessed as competent to administer people’s medicines.

Staff had completed appropriate training to meet people’s needs. Staff told us they were supported and received regular supervision with the registered manager. However, staff had not always received an annual appraisal in line with the providers’ policy. Appraisal is a periodic meeting held with a supervisor to review staff performance and plan development objectives for the following year. There was a risk that people could receive care from staff who may have required additional training and development in order to provide effective care.

We looked to see if appropriate arrangements were in place to ensure that people’s legal rights were protected by the implementation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA sets out what must be done to make sure the rights of people who need support to make decisions are protected. The one person receiving personal care at the time of our inspection was able to make their own decisions about their care and treatment. Staff had completed training in the MCA and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and were able to describe the process they would follow if a person lacked the capacity to make their own decisions to ensure people’s human and legal rights were respected.

Staff were aware of people’s nutritional needs and how to support people to eat a healthy balanced diet. The person was satisfied with the support they received with preparing meals and drinks. People were supported to access healthcare as required and to maintain and improve their health.

The person and their relatives told us staff were kind and caring and staff knew about people’s preferences and interests. The person said staff were ‘respectful’ and staff we spoke with understood how to provide dignified care in line with people’s choices.

People’s care plans were person-centred and included information about their needs, preferences and abilities. Where people’s needs changed these were updated on their care plans so they continued to receive appropriate care.

The person confirmed they were able to talk to the registered manager and staff if they had concerns. A complaints procedure was in place and available to people in an accessible format, such as easy read and pictorial where required.

Staff confirmed the registered manager was available to them for support as required. The person told us the registered manager visited them in their home on a regular basis. Staff told us how they demonstrated the provider’s values in their work with people and the person told us they were “happy and well looked after” by staff.

A system was in place to monitor the quality of the service and this included feedback form people and their relatives. An improvement plan was in place and acted on to drive continuous improvements to the service people received.