Newbarn Limited

Updated 15 August 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 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.

The inspection took place on 26 June 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available to facilitate the inspection.

The inspection was undertaken by one adult social care inspector from the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Prior to our inspection we contacted the local authority commissioning team and the safeguarding team. This helped us to gain a balanced view of what people experienced accessing the service.

We looked at notifications received by CQC. We had received a provider information return form (PIR). This form asks the provider to give us some key information about what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager, the business manager, a project lead and two support workers. We spoke with four people who used the service, two in their own homes and two at the office.

We also contacted six health and social care professionals to gain their views. All the feedback we received was extremely positive and health and social professionals told us this was a service they would recommend to others.

We looked at records including five support plans, five staff personnel files, training records, health and safety records, audits and meeting minutes.

Updated 15 August 2018

The inspection took place on 26 June 2018 and was announced. The last inspection took place on 1 September 2016 and the service was rated good overall. We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act (HSCA) 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because systems to ensure the safe handling of medicines were not sufficiently robust. At this inspection we found that the medicines policy and procedure had been reviewed and a number of changes made. Improvements had also been made to the systems used with regard to medicines and all staff had received further training in this area. This meant that the medicines systems were now safe.

Newbarn Limited is based in Rochdale, Greater Manchester. This service is a domiciliary care agency and provides 24-hour support, and personal care where required, to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to people with a range of physical and mental health needs. At the time of the inspection there were fifty people using the service.

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.

Safeguarding policies and procedures for adults and children were in place. Staff undertook annual refresher training.

Recruitment procedures were robust. The service employed their own bank of experienced support staff whom they could call upon to supplement the regular staff to cover sickness or annual leave.

The medicines policy and procedure had been reviewed and updated. Some additions had been made around error reporting and staff training following the last inspection.

There was a general risk assessment and management plan and appropriate health and safety measures were in place. Accidents and incidents were recorded appropriately.

There was a thorough induction process and training was on-going at Newbarn. There were opportunities for staff to access supplementary training relevant to their roles.

Support action plans included relevant health and personal information. There was evidence that the service worked alongside other agencies to help ensure the best outcome for each individual.

The service was working within the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA).

The service provided exceptional training for staff on equality and diversity. People’s dignity and privacy was respected by staff, who demonstrated real empathy and compassion for people they supported. Throughout our inspection we witnessed a strong person led culture; staff were highly motivated and offered kind and compassionate care.

Staff were aware of confidentiality issues and were meticulous in ensuring the confidentiality procedures were followed. Documents were suitably stored in locked cabinets and computer systems were password protected.

People who used the service were fully involved with the support planning and review processes. The service was exceptional at helping people to express their views. Opportunities for people to put forward suggestions and discuss their support included one to one conversations, questionnaires and regular tenants’ meetings.

The service encouraged a high level of independence. Positive risk taking encouraged people to take control of their own lives.

Support plans outlined people’s likes and dislikes, background, hobbies and family dynamics. People who used the service were supported to follow their own spiritual and religious beliefs and cultural practices.

Individual risk assessments clearly identified the particular risks and triggers for each person. These risk assessments were reviewed and updated on a six-monthly basis or when changes occurred.

People were encouraged to participate in community activities. The service sought feedback on a regular basis and the service had received positive comments and compliments. There was a complaints log which outlined actions taken to address any concerns.

People who used the service told us they felt well supported by the staffing structure. Staff we spoke with demonstrated a high level of pride in their service and a commitment to continual improvement and development of service delivery. We saw that person-centred, ethical, leadership was role-modelled by all lead staff.

Supervisions, appraisals and staff meetings took place on a regular basis. We saw evidence that there were high levels of constructive engagement with staff and people who used the service.

Practice observations were carried out regularly. There were a number of audits and checks undertaken at the service. Throughout the audits and checks we saw a commitment to learning, evolving and changing to help ensure the service continued to deliver support at a high level at all times.

The registered manager attended local provider forums, where good practice was shared. Other provider forums attended by senior staff at the service included the Mental Health Partnership, Learning Disability Provider Forum, Health and Wellbeing Alliance and Black, Asian, Minority Ethnic (BAME) partnership meetings.