Outreach Office

Updated 9 November 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 announced comprehensive inspection was carried out by one inspector on 24 September and 2 October 2018. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that someone would be available.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We looked at information we held about the service including notifications they had made to us about important events. We also reviewed all other information sent to us from other stakeholders for example the local authority and members of the public.

We spoke with four people who used the service and one relative. We spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager and three care workers. We reviewed three people’s care records, policies and procedures, records relating to the management of the service, training records and the recruitment records of three care workers.

Updated 9 November 2018

Outreach Office is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to adults living in their own flats. At the time of this announced inspection of 24 September 2018 there were 16 people who were provided with personal care.

At our last inspection on 1 March 2016, the service was rated Good overall. We found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good overall and improvements had been made in the key question for Safe. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service continued to provide people with safe care. There were systems in place which were intended to minimise the risks to people, including from abuse and in their daily lives. There were enough care workers to cover people’s planned care visits. Recruitment of care workers was done safely. Where people required support with their medicines, these were administered as prescribed. There were infection control systems in place to reduce the risks of cross infection.

People continued to receive an effective service. People were supported by care workers who were trained to meet their needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and care workers cared for them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Where people required support with their dietary needs, systems were in place to deliver this. People were supported to have access to health professionals where needed. The service worked with other organisations involved in people’s care to provide a consistent service.

People continued to receive a caring service. People had positive relationships with the care workers, team leaders and the registered manager. People’s dignity, privacy and independence were respected and promoted. People’s views were listened to and valued.

People continued to receive a responsive service. People received care and support which was assessed, planned and delivered to meet their individual needs. There were systems in place to support and care for people at the end of their lives, where required. A complaints procedure was in place and complaints were acted upon and used to improve the service.

People continued to receive a well-led service. There was a registered manager in post and they were building links with the local community to improve people’s lives. The service used comments from people and incidents in the service to learn from and to drive improvement. The service had a quality assurance system and shortfalls were identified and addressed. As a result, the quality of the service continued to improve.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.