Background to this inspection
Updated
9 May 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 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 12 and 14 March 2018 and was announced.
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.
Inspection site visit activity started on 12 March 2018 and ended on 14 March 2018. We visited the office location on these dates to see the manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures. We also made telephone calls to people who used the service and their relatives.
The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector and one 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 we reviewed other information we held about the service and the provider. This included previous inspection reports and statutory notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, event or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send to CQC within required timescales.
We also contacted the local authority commissioners for the service, the local authority safeguarding team and the local Healthwatch team. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.
At the time of our inspection visit there were 75 people who used the service. During the inspection we spoke with the chief executive, director of corporate services, manager and six members of staff including care staff and office staff. We also received completed questionnaires from a further five staff members. We spoke with 16 people who used the service and two relatives.
At the location’s office we viewed a range of records and how the service was managed. These included the care records of five people supported by the service, the recruitment records of four staff, training records, and records in relation to the management of the service including a range of policies and procedures.
Updated
9 May 2018
The inspection took place on 12 and 14 March 2018. The inspection was announced which meant that we gave 48 hours’ notice of our visit. This was because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that there would be someone available to support us with the inspection.
This was the first time the service had been inspected.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults, younger adults and people living with a dementia.
Not everyone using South Thornaby Community Resource Centre receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
The service had a manager in place. They had submitted an application to become registered manager and that process was underway at the time of our inspection. 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, and their relatives, told us they were happy with the care they received and believed it was a safe service.
The management team ensured there were enough staff to safely meet people’s needs. Staff rotas were planned in advance and sent to people on a weekly basis so they knew which staff would be visiting them. Wherever possible people had regular staff who visited and they were informed if staff were running late. Staff had received safeguarding training and were clear about how to recognise and report abuse.
Assessments were carried out to identify any risks to the person using the service and to the staff supporting them. This included any environmental risks in people’s homes and any risks in relation to the care and support needs of the person.
People who needed help taking their medicines were appropriately supported by staff however records were not always completed accurately.
The provider ensured appropriate checks had been completed before staff were employed to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
Training records showed staff had been provided with all the necessary training and this was scheduled to be refreshed regularly. Staff told us they were happy with the training they had received. Staff completed a thorough induction programme prior to providing people's care. The induction of new members of staff included work shadowing and complied with the requirements of the Care Certificate.
Staff told us they enjoyed their work and were well supported through supervision and appraisals. In addition ‘spot checks’ by management were completed regularly to help ensure each member of staff was providing appropriate standards of care and support.
The service was working within the principles of the MCA. Staff had received training in this area and we saw evidence of best interest decisions being made and recorded in people’s care plans.
Staff treated people respectfully and asked for consent before delivering care.
Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for. They were aware of people’s preferences and interests, as well as their health and support needs, which enabled them to provide a personalised service. However, this information was not always captured within care plan documents. There were documents within people’s care plans that had not been fully or accurately completed.
The provider was working to reduce social isolation and loneliness amongst people using the service. They promoted local activities and held events at their premises.
People had details of how to raise a complaint and told us they would be happy to make a complaint if they needed to. Any complaints received were handled in line with the provider’s policy.
There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and to seek people's views about the service. The management welcomed feedback and used the results of surveys and any complaints to drive improvement. However the audits being undertaken had not picked up the issues that we had identified during the course of the inspection.