Archived: 3 Trees Respite (Westbury)

Updated 25 July 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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 3 July 2018. We gave short notice of the inspection so that we could be sure the service was in use when we visited.

The inspection was undertaken by one Inspector. Prior to the inspection we gathered all information available to us. This included the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form completed by the provider that gives key information about the service, what they are doing well and improvements they plan to make. We also looked at any notifications about the service. Notifications are information about specific events, the provider is required to tell us by law.

During the inspection, we viewed the respite accommodation. We spoke with eight members of staff, including support staff, senior staff and the registered manager. Following the inspection, we attempted to contact relatives of all four people who used the service and were able to speak with two. We contacted professionals involved with the service but received no feedback from them. We reviewed two care files and looked at other documents in relation to the running of the home such as audits, safety records and complaints.

Updated 25 July 2018

The inspection took place on 3 July 2018 and was an announced inspection. We gave notice because the service provides respite care for up to two people and we wanted to be sure the service was being used at the time of our inspection. This was the first inspection of the respite service, although the provider also operates an outreach service. People using the service have a learning difficult and/or autism and attend the service for regular days each week.

The accommodation is made up of two self-contained flats. One of these flats was in use at the time of our inspection. Four people used the service regularly at various times throughout the year.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

People using the respite service receive accommodation and personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service provided safe care. Staffing was shared with the provider’s outreach service. Safe numbers of staff were provided in accordance with people’s assessed needs. People received support with their medicines where this was necessary. Staff liaised with families to ensure the right medicines were given at the right times.

The service was effective. Staff were aware of people’s rights in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and when necessary made decisions in their best interests. Staff worked with other health professionals when necessary to ensure people’s health needs were met. People were supported nutritionally. There were kitchen facilities in each flat for meal and snack preparation.

People were supported by staff who were kind and caring. Due to the needs of the person being supported at the time of our inspection, we weren’t able to observe care and support taking place. However, feedback from relatives was positive and they told us they were very happy with the service provided. One family member commented on how their relative’s behaviour had improved since being involved with the service.

People were treated as individuals with their own unique needs and preferences. Staff worked closely and regularly with people so that they understood their likes and preferences and how they communicated. People were able to make complaints if they wished to and were supported to do so.

The service was well led. Senior staff worked closely with support staff and the people they supported. There was a collaborative approach between senior staff, staff and people being supported to identifying areas for improvement and create strategic plans for the future of the service.