Archived: Hedleys Community Outreach Service

Updated 27 November 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.

The inspection site visit took place on 24 October 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider short notice of the inspection because we needed to be sure the office would be open to access records. One inspector visited the office location to see the management team; and to review care records, policies and procedures.

At the site visit, we spoke with the registered manager and the head of community and enterprise services. We reviewed a range of care records and the records kept regarding the management of the service. This included looking at four people’s care records, two staff files and quality assurance documentation.

On 25, 26 and 30 October 2018, the inspector conducted telephone interviews with three relatives of people who used the service. We emailed one person who used the service and two relatives at their request for their feedback. As the support staff worked remotely, we emailed 11 to obtain their views. We received two responses.

Prior to the inspection we reviewed all the information we held about Hedley’s Community Outreach Service, including any statutory notifications that the provider had sent us and any safeguarding information we had received. Notifications are made to us by providers in line with their obligations under the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. These are records of incidents that have occurred within the service or other matters that the provider is legally obliged to inform us of.

Before the inspection we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that the provider sends to CQC at least once annually with key information about the service, what improvements they have planned and what the service does well.

In addition, we contacted four local authority commissioning teams and the local adult safeguarding team to obtain their feedback about the service. One local authority responded to our request for feedback.

The inspection was partly informed by feedback from questionnaires completed by six people using services. Overall, we received positive feedback about the service and the staff.

Updated 27 November 2018

Hedley’s Community Outreach Service (known locally as Able 2) is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care and social support to people living in their own homes and whilst accessing day services. Services were provided to younger adults with a wide range of health and social care needs. At the time of our inspection there were nine people receiving a service.

The service is based within the ‘Able 2’ day centre which is also run by the Percy Hedley Foundation. Everyone who used this service accessed the day service too. However, not everyone using Hedley’s Community Outreach Service received regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. We found further developments and improvements in the responsive domain and have rated that area outstanding. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service had a new registered manager in post since our last inspection.

People received extremely person-centred care, designed to meet their needs and enable them to live full and active lives People’s needs were thoroughly assessed, planned and reviewed to ensure they received exceptional support which met their healthcare needs.

Staff encouraged and promoted activities which inspired people to participate in pastimes that were meaningful and important to them. People were empowered to get involved with social activities matched to their interests and goals. Staff ensured people were given the best support to pursue education and work experience. People had achieved very positive outcomes and fulfilled ambitions. Staff made sure people maintained links with their local community and supported opportunities for social interaction with family and friends outside of the day services they attended.

Without exception, people and relatives told us all staff were caring, kind and respectful. People said staff upheld their dignity and privacy. Support workers knew people extremely well.

The registered manager shared multiple examples of people who had achieved a positive outcome following successful support from staff.

Staff understood their responsibilities with regards to safeguarding people from harm. People told us they felt safe with support from staff and relatives confirmed this.

Staff supported people to maintain their health and safety in their own home. Fully completed risk assessments of the known risks people faced were in place for staff to follow. Accidents and incidents were recorded and investigated to resolve issues and reduce the likelihood of a repeat occurrence.

Medicines were well managed and staff protected people from the risks of infection

and cross contamination.

Staff recruitment was safe. We considered there were enough staff employed to safely and effectively meet people’s needs. People told us their support workers were consistent and arrived as expected.

Staff were qualified and experienced. They received a company induction and had regular training updates. Staff attended regular supervision sessions as part of their personal development. Support workers told us they felt supported by the management team.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met. The service worked well with external health and social care professionals who were involved with people’s care to ensure their ongoing welfare.

No-one we spoke with raised any complaints about the service. Our pre-inspection questionnaire corroborated this. No formal complaints had been received by the service. Minor issues had been logged, investigated and promptly resolved.

The registered manager ensured the service was properly monitored. Audits and analysis of all aspects of the service were in place. This provided information to the senior management team to help them identify and reduce any risks and continually improve quality. Action plans were drafted to ensure any issues identified were dealt with.

An annual survey was issued to people, relatives and staff to gather feedback. Customer and staff forums were set up and the registered manager held regular engagement drop in sessions.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.