We carried out an inspection of Southgate Beaumont DCA on 27 January 2016. This was an announced inspection where we gave the provider 48 hours’ notice because we needed to ensure someone would be available to speak with us.Southgate Beaumont DCA is a domiciliary care service for people who receive extra care in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were three people who received personal care from the agency. People lived in flats, which were adjoined with a care home that was also managed by the provider.
An inspection on 12 March 2014 found the service was compliant and the regulations were met.
The service had a registered manager in place. 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 were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. People told us they were happy with the support received from the service. Staff member knew how to report alleged abuse and were able to describe the different types of abuse. Staff knew how to ‘whistleblow’. Whistleblowing is when a worker reports wrongdoing at work to their employer or someone in authority in the public interests.
Risk assessments were recorded and plans were in place to minimise risks. We found one person who had a specific health condition that required a balanced nutritious diet. A risk assessment on nutrition was not completed to demonstrate the appropriate management of this risk. The registered manager sent us the completed risk assessment after the inspection.
People were supported by suitably qualified and experienced staff. Recruitment and selection procedures were in place and being followed. Checks had been undertaken to ensure staff were suitable for the role. Staff members were suitably trained to carry out their duties and knew their responsibilities to keep people safe and meet people’s needs.
Staff received regular one to one supervisions and had appraisals. Staff told us they were supported by their manager.
People who used the service were supported to plan their support and they received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. People were involved in the planning of their care and the care plan was then signed by people to confirm they were happy with the care and support listed on the care plan. Care plans were regularly reviewed.
Questionnaires were completed by people about the service, which we saw were positive. We were told by the registered manager that spot checks were undertaken by management, this was confirmed by staff. However, we did not see detailed documentary evidence to support this. The registered manager assured us that systems will be in place to record spot checks and its findings.
People told us they did their own weekly shopping and were able to buy ingredients to prepare their meals. People who used the service received their meals from the service were given choices and enjoyed the food that was provided.
Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and told us permission was always sought when providing support. People confirmed staff asked for consent.
There was a formal complaints procedure with response times. People were aware of how to make complaints and staff knew how to respond to complaints in accordance with the service’s complaint policy.
People enjoyed a number of activities such playing games, singing and going outside that contributed to their physical and emotional wellbeing.