8 June 2016
During a routine inspection
Franklin Domiciliary Care provides supported living to people in their own homes which was within a single block of flats named Carpenter Court. People who use the service have mental health needs. At the time of our inspection the service supported ten people who lived in single occupancy properties at Carpenter Court. The service provided domestic and social support with some personal care to a small number of people. Franklin Domiciliary Care Agency employs six support staff and a registered manager. The agency office is based on site.
There was a registered manager at this service. 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.
People who used the service and their relatives told us they felt safe and staff knew how to protect people from avoidable harm. Risk assessments and risk management plans were in place. They contained detailed guidance for staff about how to minimise the risk of harm.
There had been a period of high staff turnover, but this had begun to settle down due to the recruitment of new staff. There were sufficient staff employed to cover the number of hours provided across the service. The service used other care staff to fill in gaps in rotas within the organisation and who knew people the agency provided a service for. This meant that people who used the service were provided with a consistent service.
Staff told us the registered manager and other senior staff, employed by the service, were supportive and approachable. They also confirmed to us that the on call arrangements were well organised, and that they could seek advice and help out of hours if necessary. This meant there was good oversight of the issues across the service, and staff were confident about the management structures and who to seek advice from.
When new staff were recruited we saw the service had robust checks in place to ensure people employed were suitable to work with people who used the service.
Care plans were comprehensive and had associated risk assessments. Medicines were safely managed. Some of the people who used the service were supported with taking their prescribed medication and staff told us they were trained and competent to assist people with this.
Staff described feeling well supported by their managers. We saw evidence of supervisions taking place on a routine basis. This meant staff had the opportunity to reflect on and develop their practice.
People received support from staff who had access to appropriate training and knew how to meet people’s needs.
People were protected because staff at the service were aware of and followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
People had access to appropriate healthcare professionals and had a health action plan. This meant people’s health care needs were being appropriately supported.
There was access to varied and balanced diets, people were involved in planning and, where possible, making meals.
People were supported to be as independent as they could be and some people worked in local community organisations.
People who used the service and their relatives understood how to make complaints. Complaints were responded to appropriately by the registered manager.
Systems and processes were in place to monitor the service and make improvements where they could. This included internal audits and regular contact with people using the service, to check they were satisfied with their care packages. Policies and procedures had been updated to ensure they were in line with current guidance and legislation.