Background to this inspection
Updated
12 January 2017
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 was 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 was an announced inspection because we required the registered manager to be present to answer questions about the management and operation of the service. The inspection took place on the 2 November 2016.The inspection was carried out by one inspector who had experience in adult social care.
Prior to this inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service, including information about safeguarding and statutory notifications. Statutory notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. This enabled us to ensure we were addressing potential areas of concern at the inspection.
We had asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This 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. This demonstrated that the registered manager was open and transparent about what the agency did well and areas that they had identified would benefit from improvement. This information was reviewed to see if we would need to focus on any particular areas at the service.
As part of the inspection we spoke with twelve people who used the service, three relatives, eight care staff, four office based staff and the registered manager.
We looked at a range of records about people’s care and how the service was managed. For example, we looked at care plans, medicine administration records, risk assessments, accident and incident records, complaints records and internal audits that had been completed. We also looked at staff recruitment files and the training staff received.
We previously inspected this service on 30 January 2014 when we found no concerns.
Updated
12 January 2017
Mole Valley Reablement Service provides support for people with daily living skills and personal care for people in their own homes. Support is provided for people for up to six weeks following a period of poor health or a spell in hospital. At the time of our inspection the agency was supporting 49 people with personal care in their own homes.
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. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was present for the duration of the inspection.
Care workers knew how to keep people safe. They understood their responsibilities under safeguarding procedures and told us they would report anything that looked like abuse to the management team who they said would deal with issues immediately.
Staff recruitment procedures were safe and ensured care was provided by staff who were vetted and suitable to support people in their own home. Staff met with their line manager on a one to one basis to discuss their work. Staff said they felt supported to undertake their roles.
The agency had procedures in place to manage medicines safely and ensured only suitably qualified staff administered medicines to people.
Risks of harm to people had been identified, assessed and well managed. Information was provided to staff on how to care for people in order to reduce any risks.
The registered manager logged any accidents and incidents that occurred and put measures in place for staff to follow to mitigate any further accidents or incidents.
People’s consent to care and treatment was considered. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and about people’s capacity to make decisions.
Staff were caring to people and respected their privacy and dignity. People and relatives told us staff were polite and staff said they were always mindful that they were a visitor in people’s homes.
Staff received a good range of training specific to people’s needs. This allowed them to carry out their role in an effective and competent way.
The registered manager undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. Any areas identified as needing improvement were addressed by the registered manager to drive improvement and provide better services for people.
If an emergency occurred for example adverse weather conditions or an outbreak of staff sickness people’s care would not be interrupted as there were procedures in place to manage this.
A complaints procedure was available for any concerns. This was included in the information pack people were given when they engaged the services of the agency. People knew how to make a complaint but said they never used the formal process and issues got addressed immediately.
We looked at records in the agency’s office relating to the care of people and the management of the service. These included care plans, risk assessments, medicine records, staff recruitment and training files and a range of policies and procedures. These were well maintained and regularly monitored by the registered manager to ensure the quality of record keeping was appropriate.