Archived: Mencap - West Suffolk Domiciliary Care Agency

We inspected the offices on 12 December 2016 and telephoned people, their relatives and staff for their feedback about the service on 13 December 2016. We gave 48 hours’ notice before the inspection to make sure that some people who used the service, staff members and the management team were available to talk with us. At our last inspection on 21 January 2014, the service was found to be meeting the required standards in the areas we looked at.

There was a manager in post who had registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 supported by service and assistant service managers responsible for the day-to-day operation of each location where people received care and support.

People told us that staff helped them stay safe, both where they lived and when supported out and about in the community. Staff had received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and were knowledgeable about the potential risks and how to report concerns.

Robust recruitment practices were followed and there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff available at all times to meet people’s support needs. Plans and guidance were in place to help staff deal with unforeseen events and emergencies in a safe and effective way. People were supported to take their medicines safely and at the right time by trained staff. Potential risks to people’s health and well-being were identified, reviewed and managed effectively.

People who received support, relatives and health care professionals were positive about the skills, experience and abilities of staff employed at the service. Staff received training relevant to their roles and had regular one to one meetings with managers to discuss and review their personal development and performance.

People were encouraged and helped to maintain good health and had access to health and social care professionals when necessary. They were also supported to eat a healthy balanced diet that met their individual needs.

Staff obtained people’s agreement to the support provided and always obtained their consent before helping them with personal care. Staff supported people in a kind and caring way that promoted their dignity. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported and where clearly very knowledgeable about their needs and personal circumstances. At the time of our inspection we found that the provider was working within the principles of the MCA where it was necessary and appropriate to the needs of the people they supported.

People who received support, and their relatives wherever possible and appropriate, were involved in the planning and reviews of the care provided. People were helped to learn and acquire life skills which made them more independent and able to move on to live independently.

People received personalised care and support that met their needs and took account of their preferences. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s background histories, preferences and routines. People were supported to pursue social interests and take part in meaningful activities relevant to their needs.

Relatives told us that managers and staff listened to them and responded positively to any concerns they had. People were encouraged to raise any concerns they had and knew how to make a complaint if the need arose.

People, their relatives, staff and health and social care professionals were complimentary about the management team and how the service was operated at all of the locations where support was provided. The management team monitored the quality of services and potential risks in order to drive continuous improvement.

We saw that the service made sure that people consented to care before it was given and for those who could not consent for themselves the correct legal processes had been followed. One person told us about the process for choosing a new person to share their house, "We get to choose and see if we like them".

We saw people had been involved in their care plan and that they were person centred, regularly reviewed and clearly identified people's needs and any risks to them.

We saw that medicines were managed safely and effectively and that staff were appropriately trained to administer them.

We found that there were enough skilled and experienced staff at each location we viewed and that staff were provided with the training they needed to carry out their roles effectively.

We saw that the service had effective systems to assess and monitor its quality.

We found that one location was not managing people's medicines safely, reviewing people's care plans appropriately and providing adequate staffing. The provider is already working in partnership with the local authority to address these issues.