Archived: Travis Gardens

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with people using the service, the staff supporting them and looking at records.

If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People are treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe. One person we spoke with said, 'I like to come here, I get well looked after and we go out and do lots of things that I like.'

Posters were displayed in the home in a suitable format to ensure people who used the service knew who to contact if they were worried or did not feel safe.

Systems were in place to make sure that the manager and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.

Is the service effective?

There was an advocacy service available if people needed it, this meant that when required people could access additional support.

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw staff showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting the person receiving the service.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

The manager told us that the service was built around the needs of people who used the service. Staff told us menus and activities were planned to encourage people to be as independent as possible. One person we spoke with said, 'I like to have a Chinese takeaway when I stay at Travis Gardens, it's one of my favourite meals.'

People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly. The home had its own adapted minibus and people carrier, which helped to keep people involved with their local community.

Is the service well-led?

The service provides short respite stays therefore there was only a small staff group. The manager and staff provided a person centred service. It was clear that they worked very hard to ensure people enjoy their stay at the home. Activities and meals were tailored to meet the needs of the people who used the service.

The service had a structured quality assurance system. We saw records that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuingly improving.

Staff told us there were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.

People told us they were happy with the care they received. We also reviewed care records which showed that risk assessments and formal reviews were undertaken to ensure care was effective and safe.

People told us they felt safe at the home. There was a policy on safeguarding people from abuse and care workers we spoke with understood how to report any suspicions of abuse.

We found that care workers got appropriate training, supervision and development.

People who used the service told us they were asked for their opinion as to the quality of care provided. There were also systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service people received.