Archived: Beaulieu Outreach Team

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led

This is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

We found the service was safe because people were cared for by staff who were knowledgeable about their needs and had the skills to provide the support people required. People were assessed prior to receiving care and support plans were developed to show how their needs would be met. Risk assessments were completed and measures to reduce risks were put in place.

Appropriate checks were completed prior to employees commencing work for the service. We found the dates of the checks and the dates staff started working confirmed that staff had not worked until appropriate checks had been completed. We spoke with three members of staff who were clear about their role and responsibilities.

The service had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, although no applications have been made. Relevant staff had received training to enable them to understand when an application should be made. This meant people would be safeguarded as required.

Is the service effective?

The parent of one young person who used the service said the 'staff are very good and are very adaptable to [their child's] needs. They understand his disability and work really well with him'. Another parent told us that care staff 'understand [their son's] needs totally. They totally get him'.

Staff were knowledgeable about people's care needs and how to meet them. Staff had received training to ensure they had the skills necessary to care for people. Staff told us about the care they were providing for specific people which matched information in the person's care plan.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. People said they were treated with respect and before they received any support they were asked for their consent and staff acted in accordance with their wishes. The records we looked at showed the staff took into account individual's wishes and these were respected, when providing care. One parent said, 'I can't stress enough how great they [care staff] have been. They have done a fantastic job helping [their son] they have worked really well with him'. Another parent told us that as a result of the support provided by the care worker their son had 'come a long way. We wouldn't be where we are today without their help'.

The staff we spoke with said they felt that they had sufficient time to meet people's needs and had received training relevant to their role.

Is the service responsive?

The service was flexible and responsive to people's changing and urgent needs. Discussions with the manager showed they were aware of how to get advice and support when required.

Parents told us they been involved in their children's assessments and support planning. This meant their views and preferences were taken into account when providing care. Arrangements were in place to support people out of hours. People were confident that any concerns raised would be dealt with and responded to as needed. There was a process to support the staff in responding to people's needs.

There was an effective complaints procedure in place. The manager told us they had received two complaints during the previous year. We saw these and the manager was able to explain what action they had taken in respect of each complaint.

Is the service well-led?

There was a clear management structure. There were also procedures in place to monitor the quality of service provided with audits, such as for care plans and analysis of when calls are cancelled, being completed.

The service provided care through a planned six week intervention package. At the conclusion of each six week period the young person using the service was asked to complete an easy read feedback form. Their parents were also request to complete a feedback survey. We saw the results of both of these surveys which were positive.

People's personal records were accurate and fit for purpose. These were kept in a secure location, which ensured personal information was kept confidential. Records were kept for the appropriate period of time and then destroyed securely.

We looked at six care plans and related documents. These were clear and detailed regarding the care people required and how this could be provided. We saw the plans and risk assessments were current and, where appropriate, had been reviewed regularly. We spoke with four members of staff including the manager and they were all able to demonstrate a good understanding of the needs and risks relating to the care of the young people they were responsible for.

Staff said they felt supported by their manager; they told us they had completed a comprehensive induction programme and received appropriate training. Staff had received safeguarding children training and were aware of procedures for reporting concerns. We found the provider had an effective quality assurance system in place and sought the views of the families who use the service through an annual survey. One parent told us 'for us they provide an excellent service'. We spoke with a stakeholder who told us 'they are excellent communicators; they are always looking for activities for the young person. For me, it works well'.