Background to this inspection
Updated
13 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 took place on 9 October 2015 and was announced. The registered provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available to see us. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
We reviewed the information we held about the home and looked at the notifications they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.
As part of the inspection we spoke to 11 people and nine relatives. We also spoke with five care staff, the recruitment coordinator, the care co-ordinator, manager as well as the registered provider.
We reviewed the care records held at the office for five people and viewed three staff recruitment records. We also viewed records relating to the management and quality assurance of the service including monthly checks.
Updated
13 January 2016
The inspection took place on 9 October 2015 and was unannounced.
The service provides personal care to people living either in their own home or the home of a family member. At the time of the inspection, approximately 150 people used the service and a manager was in post. The manager had recently applied to become the registered manager. 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.
People told us they felt safe and staff also understood how they should keep people safe. People were supported by staff that thought there were enough staff to cover the calls to people. The way that people received their medicines was reviewed to ensure that people that received support to take their medicines, received them as they should.
People received care from care staff that they felt had received the training they needed to care for people. Training was reviewed regularly so that staff received updated training as and when this was required.
People’s consent was appropriately obtained by staff when caring for them and people who could not make decisions for themselves were supported by representatives, such as a social worker or relative.
People enjoyed the meals prepared for them and were supported to eat and drink enough to keep them healthy. Care staff involved people in deciding what meals and snacks they would like. Where people had special dietary requirements, care staff understood these and took their needs into account.
Changes in people’s care needs were shared with care staff so they respond to people’s needs accordingly. Where care staff became concerned or unsure, they would either contact the manager, a relative or the GP to seek further advice.
People liked the staff that cared for them and care staff involved people when caring for them.
People’s privacy and dignity were respected and people were treated in a manner they would expect to be treated. People were also supported to make choices affecting their care.
People were aware of how to raise complaints and people felt they could speak to the administration staff in the office or the manager. Complaints reviewed demonstrated that there was a system in place for acknowledging, reviewing and responding to complaints.
People’s care and the quality of their care was routinely monitored. The quality of the care people received was checked regularly and reviewed to ensure improvements were made where necessary.