Background to this inspection
Updated
21 March 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 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.
This inspection took place on 19 and 20 February 2018. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the service is small and the registered manager can be out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be available.
Before the inspection, we checked for any notifications made to us by the provider and the information we held on our database about the service and provider. Statutory notifications are pieces of information about important events which took place at the service, such as safeguarding incidents, which the provider is required to send to us by law. We reviewed the Provider Information Record (PIR). The PIR provides key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements the provider plans to make. We also spoke to the main commissioning body for the service.
The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors and two Experts by Experience, which is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Their involvement was limited to phoning people using the service and their relatives to ask them their views of the service.
There were 70 people using the service at the time of our inspection visit. During the inspection, we spoke with twelve people and five relatives, and visited one person in their home. We also spoke to eight care staff, the care manager, the care coordinator and the registered manager.
We reviewed the care records for eight people using the service to see if they were up-to-date and reflective of the care which people received. We also looked at records for six members of staff, including details of their recruitment, training and supervision. We reviewed further records relating to the management of the service, including complaint and safeguarding records, to see how the service was run.
Updated
21 March 2018
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to older adults living in their own homes. At our last inspection in October 2015 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
The service had a registered manager in post. 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.
The service helped people to stay safe. Staff knew about abuse and how to report it and other incidents or accidents which took place. Risks to people were regularly assessed and there were systems in place to ensure there was enough staff to meet people's needs.
People were supported to take their medicines safely and in accordance with the prescribed instructions. Staff members received the training, support and development opportunities they needed to be able to meet people's needs.
People had a care plan that provided staff with direction and guidance about how to meet their individual needs and wishes. Assessments were carried out to identify any risks to the person using the service and to the staff supporting them. This included any environmental risks in people's homes and any risks in relation to the care and support needs of the person. People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and were aware of their care plans.
Staff had been recruited safely, received on-going training relevant to their role and supported by the registered manager. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people in their care. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for and responded appropriately as people's needs changed.
Staff spoke positively about the people they supported and were motivated to provide an individualised service in line with people's needs and goals.
People confirmed there was a stable staff team and that care was provided by familiar faces. Staff told us that travel times were sufficient, so they were not rushed.
People's feedback about their experience of the service was positive. People said staff treated them respectfully and asked them how they wanted their care and support to be provided. People told us they had their care visits as planned. Staff mostly arrived on time and stayed for the allotted time. Nobody reported any recent missed visits.
Staff wore protective clothing such as gloves and aprons when needed. This reduced the risk of cross infection. Supplies were available around the building for staff to use when they needed them.
People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. People’s views on the service were regularly sought and acted on.
Staff were motivated and proud to work for the service; as a result staff turnover was kept to a minimum ensuring that continuity of care was in place for most people who used the service.
Staff were respectful of people’s privacy and maintained their dignity.
There were processes in place to monitor quality and understand the experiences of people who used the service. We saw that regular visits and phone calls had been made using the service and their relatives in order to obtain feedback about the staff and the care provided.
The service worked in co-operation with other organisations such as healthcare services to deliver effective care and support
The service listened and responded to people’s concerns and complaints, and used this to improve the quality of care. The service learnt lessons and made improvements when things went wrong.