Archived: Reardon Court Domiciliary Care Agency

Updated 12 January 2015

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 regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process under Wave 1.

The inspection team consisted of two people – an inspector and an expert by experience. This is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

We reviewed all the information we held about the service before our visit.

There were 16 people using the service on the day of our visit. We spoke with eight of them and four relatives. We looked at the care records of four people and two staff records. We spoke with two care workers, the manager of the extra care sheltered housing service, the registered manager and the provider’s service manager.

We looked at records and reviewed information given to us by the provider and managers. We looked at audits and incidents logs, service user and relative meeting minutes, staff meeting minutes and staff records during the visit, and a selection of the provider’s policies and procedures of the service following the visit.

Updated 12 January 2015

Reardon Court Domiciliary Care Agency is a service for 26 people receiving personal care in extra care sheltered housing. It is part of a wider care complex including a care home and a day centre. The service had a registered manager who was also the registered manager for the provider’s residential care home. A team leader provided the day to day management of the service.

Although, most people and their visitors told us people felt safe we found that aspects of the service were not safe. People we spoke with told us of concerns they had about the competency of agency staff who were brought in when there was a shortage of permanent staff. We also found some medicines administration errors. Care was effective. People were supported to receive the care they wanted and needed. Most people and those significant to them told us that staff were caring and kind. However, we were told by people that some care staff were not respectful to some people.

The care provided was not always responsive to people’s needs. Most people were supported to express their views and make decisions about their care and support. However, staff and managers were not aware of best interest decisions and capacity assessments for people who were unable to make some decisions.

People and relatives told us that the team manager and staff were approachable. Regular audits were made of the service and accidents, incidents and complaints were monitored. Some improvements identified by the service had been made and others were planned. However we found some issues during our visit which had not been identified by the audits. Effective staff recruitment, training and support for staff was in place. Most people’s views of the service were sought.