The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Craegmoor Supporting You in Bristol & Wiltshire

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Unit 57, Easton Business Centre, Felix Road, Bristol, Avon, BS5 0HE (0117) 415 304

Provided and run by:
Craegmoor Supporting You Limited

All Inspections

7 August 2014

During a routine inspection

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 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

Craegmoor Supporting You in Bristol & Wiltshire is a ‘supported living’ service. This type of service helps people to live independently in their own homes and in the local community. Some people who received support had their own flats and others were tenants in a house which had shared communal areas.

This was an announced inspection, which meant the provider knew we would be visiting. This was because we wanted to make sure the registered manager, or someone who could act on their behalf, would be available to support the inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law, as does the provider.

People received support and guidance which promoted their safety. However improvement was needed in the procedure for recruiting staff. This was not as thorough as it should have been to protect people from the risks of unsuitable staff.

The service was effective in meeting people’s needs. One person commented; "It lets me be independent". Staff received training so they were competent when providing support. A staff member told us; "I know exactly what I should be doing and when." This was because there were support plans in place which clearly set out the support that had been agreed with people.

Staff sought to obtain people’s views and to provide support in the way they wanted. Staff had good information about people so support could be tailored to their individual needs and preferences. People who were tenants in a shared house were supported with making decisions which helped them to maintain good relationships.

People had support plans which were kept under review to reflect their current needs. Activities such as "going out late at night" had been assessed so that any risks to people could be identified and reduced. Staff emphasised the importance of supporting people in the community. People had been given information so they knew what to do if they had any concerns about their care and support.

People benefited from a well run service. The registered manager was described as "very hands on" and as knowing how she wanted the service to develop so it was more responsive to people’s needs. The provider had systems in place for monitoring the service and for identifying what was working well and where improvements were needed.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report. 

26 July 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We looked at standards relating to care and to record keeping which were not being met when we inspected the service in May 2013. We also looked at the management of people's medicines.

As part of this inspection we visited a house that was shared by people who received support from the service. We received positive feedback from people and found that their needs were being met. When talking about their personal circumstances, one person commented 'everyone's trying to support me and help me through it'. Another person told us they were happy with the support they received with their medicines. We found that the recording of medicines had improved and there were suitable arrangements in place to ensure that medicines were being managed safely.

People's support plans had been rewritten and other records were being more fully completed. As a result they provided better information about people's current needs and how they liked to be supported. Overall the standard of recording had improved and the risk of people receiving unsafe care and support had reduced.

22, 24, 29 May 2013

During a routine inspection

People who used the service received a range of support according to their individual needs. For some people, this included assistance with personal care and with managing their healthcare needs.

As part of this inspection we visited a house that was shared by four people who received support from the service. People received support from staff which helped them to maintain their independence and take part in community activities. However, the feedback we received highlighted that the service was not meeting everyone's individual needs. We found that the support being provided to one person lacked an organised and consistent approach. In particular there had been occasions when they had not received the support that had been planned and agreed.

There was a suitable complaints procedure and people had the opportunity to raise any concerns either formally or informally. Systems were in place for monitoring the quality of the service people received. Audits and monitoring visits were being undertaken and these identified areas for improvement. However, records continued to be an area where the standard was not being met. Action needed to be taken to ensure that they were accurate and up to date.

2 November 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us that the service was meeting their needs. Staff supported people in different areas of their lives; one person for example said that staff helped them with their activities in the community. Another person told us that they were 'nearly independent', but that staff helped them with things that they found difficult.

People told us that they knew who to speak to if they had any concerns. Staff received training and guidance which helped to ensure that they supported people safely. People commented: 'always been very happy with them' and 'they do a good job" when they were talking about the staff team. We were told that the people who used the service had a role in the selection procedure when new support workers were being recruited.

People were being asked for their views and could take part in meetings which helped them to 'sort things out'. There were systems in place for checking the quality of the service that people received. We found shortcomings in record keeping and there was a lack of good information in some records; this meant that people were not well protected from the risk of inappropriate care and support.