Background to this inspection
Updated
28 January 2017
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.
The inspection visit took place on 15 December 2016 and was announced. 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit was given to make sure the registered manager was available. We also planned to visit people in their own homes and wanted to make sure this was acceptable. The inspection team included an inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Before the inspection visit, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed the information that we held about the service to inform and plan our inspection. This included information that we had received and statutory notifications. A statutory notification contains information relating to significant events that the provider must send to us as required by law.
We contacted Healthwatch Leicestershire who are the local consumer champion for people using adult social care services to see if they had feedback about the service. We also contacted the local authority who had funding responsibility for some of the people who were using the service.
We spoke with nine people who used the service and with a visiting relative of another person who had recently moved out of the service. We also spoke with the registered manager, a senior manager within the organisation and seven care staff. We observed care being offered to people in the communal areas of the scheme to understand people’s experiences of care.
We looked at the care records of four people who used the service and three staff files. We also looked at other records in relation to the running of the service. These included medicine records, health and safety documents and quality checks that the registered manager had undertaken.
We asked the registered manager to submit documentation to us after our visit. This was in relation to information about accidents and incidents that had occurred and their quality checks. They submitted these to us in the timescale agreed.
Updated
28 January 2017
We inspected the service on 15 December 2016 and the visit was announced. We gave notice of our inspection because we needed to be sure somebody would be available at the office.
Help at Home (Connaught House) provides personal care and support to people living in an Extra Care service. Extra Care schemes enable people to live in their own flats or apartments with support available on site should they require it. At the time of our inspection 36 people were receiving personal care and support.
There was a registered manager in place. It is a requirement that the service has a 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People felt safe with the support offered by staff members. Staff understood their responsibilities to help protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. The provider had systems in place to manage and deal with accidents and incidents. This included assessing risks to people’s well-being. For example, where people were at risk of falling, staff had guidance available to them to follow.
People’s accommodation and equipment were checked for their safety. The provider had plans in place to keep people safe during emergency situations, such as a fire.
People were satisfied with the number of staff available to provide their support. Staff were checked for their suitability before starting work for the provider so that people received support from those appropriate to work within the caring profession.
People received their medicines when they required it. Where people required support to take their medicines, this was undertaken in a safe way by staff who had received guidance. Staff knew what to do should a mistake occur when handling people’s medicines.
People received support from staff who had the required skills and knowledge. Staff received an induction when they started working for the provider and training and guidance was offered to them. This included meeting with the registered manager to discuss their performance. Staff felt supported and received feedback on their work through, for example, staff meetings. Staff understood their responsibilities including reporting the poor practice of their colleagues should they have needed to.
People received support in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People could make decisions for themselves and the registered manager and staff knew their responsibilities should they have concerns about changes to people’s mental capacity.
People’s food and drink preferences were known by staff and where there were concerns that people were not eating enough, staff monitored and took any necessary action. People had access to healthcare services to promote their well-being.
People received support from staff who showed kindness and compassion. Their dignity and privacy was protected including the safe handling of their sensitive and private information. Staff knew the people they supported including their life histories and things that mattered to them which showed good relationships had been established.
People were involved in planning their support and were supported to be as independent as they wanted to be. For example, by helping to prepare their own meals. Where people required additional support, advocacy information was available to them.
People had contributed to the planning and review of their support requirements. They had care plans that were focused on them as individuals that guided staff to offer them care and support in line with their preferences. People had opportunities to take part in activities that they enjoyed.
People knew how to make a complaint. The provider had a complaints policy in place that was available for people. The registered manager took action when a complaint was received.
People and staff members would recommend the service to their families and friends. They had opportunities to give feedback to the provider. For example, the provider visited people in their own homes to ask about their satisfaction with the service they received. We saw that the provider took action where this was necessary following feedback received.
The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities. This included them checking the quality of the service. We saw, for example, that checks on people’s care records occurred monthly to make sure they contained the required information as well as on the reasons why accidents had occurred. Where the provider needed to make improvements, they took action.