This inspection took place on 26 June 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours' notice for this inspection because we needed to be sure that someone would be available to support us with the inspection process.

Cheviots Childrens Centre provides short breaks and family support to children with learning disabilities including autism and complex physical needs. This includes providing parents with a home sitting service in the children's own home so that the parents can have a break from their caring role. The home sitting service forms part of a combination of services in order to support and enable children and their families to lead ordinary family lives. At the time of the inspection there were three children using the service.

At the last inspection, the service was rated ‘Good’.

At this inspection we found the service ‘Good’.

Policies and procedures about safeguarding children and young people were available to all including home carers and detailed the processes to be followed to protect children and young people from harm. Records confirmed and home carers told us that they had received training on how to safeguard young people and children and the steps they would take if abuse was suspected.

Risk assessments had been completed which identified environmental risks as well as risks associated with the child’s health and support needs. Risk assessments outlined the details of the risk, the signs to look for and ways in which the risk was to be reduced of mitigated in order to keep the child or young person safe from avoidable harm.

The service currently did not support anyone with medicine administration. However, policies and procedures were in place if this level of support was assessed to be required.

Safe and robust recruitment processes had been followed when recruiting home carers to work with vulnerable children and young adults.

All newly recruited home carers underwent induction and also received training as part of their on-going development. Home carers confirmed that they were regularly supported through supervision.

Care plans were person centred and gave detail about the child or young person, their likes and dislikes as well as information on how care and support was to be delivered. Each child or young person had been allocated a regular home carer with whom positive relationships had been established.

The service was registered to support children and young people under the age of 18. At the time of the inspection the service was not supporting anyone over the age of 16 years, therefore the legal requirement to consider people's mental capacity and ability to make decisions was not required. However, records confirmed that parents had signed all care planning documents confirming that they had consented to the care and support that their child received.

The service had a complaints policy in place which was also available as part of each child or young person’s care folder that was kept at the child’s or young person’s own home. The service confirmed that they had not received any formal complaints since the last inspection. Parents confirmed that they knew the processes to follow if they had any concerns and felt confident that there concerns would be addressed appropriately.

The service had a number of quality assurance systems in place to monitor and evaluate the quality of care provided which enabled the service to analyse the data in order to learn and make the appropriate improvements to the provision of care and support.

Further information about our findings is detailed in the sections below.

We undertook an announced inspection on 20 April 2015 of Cheviots Children’s Centre - HSCA. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. We gave the provider notice of our inspection as we needed to make sure that someone was at the office in order for us to carry out the inspection.

Cheviots Children’s Centre – HSCA is a service for children and young people with learning, sensory and physical disabilities in the London Borough of Enfield. The service is registered to provide personal care for children and young people aged 2-18 in their homes. At the time of our inspection, the service was providing care to four families which consisted of home sitting for a number of hours per month.

At our last inspection on 21 January 2014 the service met the regulations inspected.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

Relatives of children who used the service told us they were confident that their children were safe around care staff. The service had taken steps and arrangements were in place to help ensure children were protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns or allegations of abuse.

Children were cared for by staff who were supported to have the necessary knowledge and skills to carry out their roles and responsibilities. Staff had been carefully recruited and provided with an induction and training they needed to enable them to care effectively for children. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the needs of the children they cared for. Staff spoke positively about their experiences working at the service and the support they received from management.

Managers at the service were aware of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). However, due to the nature of this particular service, the MCA did not apply as the service provides care to children. CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care services. DoLS ensure that an individual being deprived of their liberty is monitored and the reasons why they are being restricted is regularly reviewed to make sure it is still in the person’s best interests. However, due to the nature of this particular service, DoLS were not applicable.

Care support plans were person-centred, detailed and specific to each child and their needs. We saw that their care preferences were reflected. Children and their relatives had been consulted and activities reflected their individual interests, likes and dislikes.

The service had a system in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service which included satisfaction surveys and questionnaires. The feedback received from relatives was positive and no concerns had been raised.

There were 10 children and young people using the home care service at the time of our inspection. We spoke with four families, staff and the management team at the service. When describing their child's care, one parent told us, “As a parent it allows me to have a short break from direct care”. Another parent told us care workers attended to young people's needs well and described the relationship between staff and young people as , " caring, more like friends than staff."

The service respected and involved families in their care, and were developing meaningful ways of engaging children and young people. Care plans were updated annually with children or young people and their families as well as relevant health and social care professionals.

Required checks were received before staff were employed to work with children and young people. Managers regularly sought feedback from families and staff and acted on this to collaboratively improve the quality of the service provided. A family member said "whenever I have brought things up in the past they have listened and we have sorted it out."

One parent's view was representative when they spoke about choosing the home care and home sitting service, and said "I would rather use Cheviots as I always know that things will get done well." Parents and carers we spoke with told us that staff were respectful and involved children in making decisions in relation to the home care provided, using verbal and non verbal communication. One parent told us that their carer had developed an "in depth understanding of the things they like or dislike."

Care planning and reviews took place regularly with involvement from people, and were signed as agreed by parents. We found that the staff understood children's care needs and how to protect them from risk and harm. All staff received appropriate training. Appropriate checks were being done by the provider to ensure that the records were appropriately maintained.

Relatives spoken with stated that interactions between members of staff and people using the service were positive and respectful. We were told that the religious needs of people using the service were addressed. The staff who were interviewed were able to describe the care and support they gave to the young people they supported. Relatives all confirmed they were happy with the care provided.

The management team confirmed they promoted same gender care to further increase young people’s safety. Relatives contacted said they felt the young people were safe in the staff members care and this provided them with reassurance.

Feedback from a relative on a survey form stated that “the service and staff were brilliant, the staff responded to the persons needs with complete commitment and they do not need me to tell them what to do”. We were informed that staff were always on time and had the knowledge and skill to meet the young person’s needs.

The relatives contacted all spoke very positively about the service.