Archived: Barnabas House

Updated 9 October 2015

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 took place on 9 September 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was completed by two inspectors.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service, including the Provider Information Return (PIR) which the provider completed before the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed previous reports and notifications that are held on the CQC database. Notifications are important events that the service has to let the CQC know about. We also reviewed information received from a local authority.

On the day of the inspection we met the manager at their office and spoke with them and two members of staff. We reviewed three care records, training records, two staff recruitment and support files, audits and minutes of staff meetings. We met and spoke with two people who used the service.

Updated 9 October 2015

The inspection took place on 9 September 2015. Barnabas House is a domiciliary care agency which offers personal care, companionship and domestic help to support people. There are currently 5 people using the service.

The service has 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.

People were safeguarded from the potential of harm and their freedoms protected. People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. Staff had up to date information about people’s needs which meant they were more effective in delivering appropriate care. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Staff had received regular training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care. The service worked well with other professionals to ensure that people's health needs were met. Where appropriate, support and guidance were sought from health care professionals, including GPs, community learning disability teams and consultant psychiatrists. People were supported with their nutrition and hydration needs. Staff supported people with their medication as required.

Staff knew the people they were supporting and provided a personalised service. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and people were involved in making decisions about their care. Staff were attentive to people's needs and treated people with dignity and respect.

People were supported with activities which interested them. People knew how to make a complaint; complaints had been resolved efficiently and quickly.

The manager had a number of ways of gathering people’s views including talking with people, staff, and relatives. They carried out a number of quality monitoring audits to help ensure the service was running effectively and to make improvements.