Archived: Care and Respite Support Services Limited

Updated 29 January 2016

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 was carried out by one adult social care inspector. The inspection took place over two days and was announced. The registered provider was given 48 hours notice because we needed to be sure that someone would be at the office.

During our inspection we visited four people who used the service in their homes. We also spoke with nine care workers, three office staff, the manager and the chief executive officer. We looked at people’s care records, staff records and records relating to the management of the service.

Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service including notifications that the registered provider had sent us.

Updated 29 January 2016

This was an announced inspection, carried out on 10 & 15 December 2015. ‘48 hours’ notice of the inspection was given because the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in the office.

The service provides care and support to people living in their own homes as well as supporting people to access the community.

The service does not have a manager registered with CQC. 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 last inspection of Care and Respite Support Services Limited was carried out in September 2013 and we found that the service was meeting all the regulations that were assessed.

People had no concerns about their safety and the way they were treated by staff. There were systems in place to protect people from abuse including training for staff and policies and procedures for staff to follow. Staff recognised what abuse was and they were confident about reporting any concerns they had. Recruitment of staff was thorough and safe which ensured people received support from staff who were fit and suitable for the job. People were supported by the right amount of suitably qualified staff.

Staff were confident about dealing with emergency situations and they had details of people and services they could contact if they needed advice, guidance or support at any time of the day or night.

People’s needs were assessed and planned for and staff had information about how to meet people’s needs. People’s wishes and preferences and their preferred method of communication were reflected in the care plans. Contact records which were maintained for each person showed they had received the right care and support. Care plans were regularly reviewed and updated to ensure they remained up to date.

People were involved in the development of their care plans and had agreed with the contents. People confirmed that they had helped plan their own care and had read and agreed with their care plan.

Staff received training and support to carry out their job and they were provided with opportunities to develop within their roles. Staff had their competencies checked and they had access to policies and procedures in relation to safe practice.

The service was flexible around people’s needs and people were notified promptly of any delays. Changes people requested such as visit times were accommodated without any question and if staff were running late they ensured people were contacted and informed of this.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. Policies and procedures were in place to guide staff in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Decisions made on behalf of people were made in accordance with the law to ensure they were made in people’s best interests.

People had access to information about how to complain and they were confident about voicing any concerns they had. Complaints were taken seriously and dealt with in a timely way.

People were complimentary about the manager and the way she managed the service, they described the manager as approachable and supportive. There were good lines of communication across the service. People who used the service and staff were notified of changes in a timely way and they were consulted about plans for future developments of the service.

There were systems in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service. A dedicated member of staff carried out a range of checks on all aspects of the service. This included checks on documentation to make sure it was up to date and accurate and seeking people’s views about the service they received. The registered provider had a set of policies and procedures which guided people who used the service and staff about good care and practice issues.