Archived: Somerset Care Community (Mendip)

Somerset Care Community (Mendip) provides personal care to people living in the towns and villages in the Mendip area. At the time of this inspection they were providing personal care for 176 people. They also provided a domestic service to people living in their own homes.

There was not a registered manager in post. 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. We discussed the need for the service to have a registered manager with the regional operations manager. They agreed the manager in post at the time of the inspection would submit an application to register with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). On the second day of the inspection we saw a confirmation message from CQC that the manager’s application to register had been submitted.

The last inspection of the service was carried out in February and March 2015. At that inspection we found due to low staffing levels people experienced a lack of consistency with regular staff. At this inspection we found there had been an improvement in staffing levels and the consistency of care workers visiting people. Some people told us they had seen an improvement and the manager confirmed they were still working to ensure people received care and support from a consistent team of staff.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good

The service continued to provide safe care and support for people. There were adequate numbers of staff to provide the care and support people needed. However, there were mixed comments on staff arriving punctually at the time visits were due. Most people said there had been an issue in the past but it had improved and staff were arriving on time. However, a few people said they still experienced staff arriving later than the time they had been informed they would arrive. The manager had put systems in place to improve this experience for people which were on-going.

People were protected from abuse because the provider had systems in place to ensure checks of new staff and their suitability to work with vulnerable adults were carried out. Staff had also received training in protecting vulnerable people from abuse. People said they felt safe when being cared for; we observed people were happy and relaxed with care workers during our home visits.

The service continued to provide effective care and support. People were supported by staff who had a clear knowledge and understanding of their personal needs, likes and dislikes. We observed staff took time to talk with people during our home visits. However, people had mixed opinions about the consistency of the staff team visiting them. Most people said they had a regular team of staff who they knew and had built relationships with, whilst others said they had met a number of different staff members. The manager confirmed an on-going staff recruitment programme meant they were now able to provide people with a more consistent team of staff.

The service continued to provide care workers who were caring and compassionate. People told us the care workers were kind, caring and often went above and beyond what was expected of them. We observed very caring interactions during home visits and every visit was accompanied with cheerful banter.

The service had improved their rating in responsive to good. People’s care needs were recorded and reviewed regularly with team leaders and the person receiving the care or a relevant representative. All care plans included written consent to the care provided. Care workers had comprehensive information and guidance in care plans to enable them to deliver consistent care the way people preferred. People told us they or a relative had been involved in drawing up a care plan and they also confirmed the care plan was reviewed regularly with them. Records showed the service responded to concerns and complaints and learnt from the issues raised.

The service continued to be well led. There were systems in place to monitor the care provided and people’s views and opinions were sought through care reviews and an annual survey. Suggestions for change were listened to and actions taken where possible to improve the service provided. All incidents and accidents were monitored, trends identified and learning shared with staff to put into practice.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. These included visiting people in their own homes, sending surveys to people and telephone interviews with people who use the service or their relatives.

Our inspection took place over two days. We spent one day in the office reviewing records and visiting people in their own homes. The other day we talked with staff and visited people in their own homes and spoke with their relatives.

We observed people being treated in a caring and attentive manner.

The majority of people spoken with told us they were happy with the care provided by the support workers. Some comments about the care received were; “staff are respectful, kind and know me. Staff are fairly consistent. “

We found the main area of peoples’ concerns were when they didn’t know which staff were visiting and at what time. Some people didn’t like the frequent changes in staff.

We found the management of people's medicines was well organised and staff were trained effectively to carry this out safely.

We found the organisation had effective recruitment practices to assure staff employed were able to work with people safely and effectively.

Staff told us they received training on a regular basis that enabled them to carry out their job. They felt supported by their peers and the management team and they had opportunities to express views and opinions about how the service was run.

The agency had systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of its service and showed examples of improvements they had made to service delivery in response to comments people who used the service.

Everyone we spoke was complimentary of the staff. Comments included 'the majority of staff are very attentive and caring'. Several people said 'the staff encourage me to do as much for myself as possible and this enables me to stay in my own home, and be as independent as possible'. 'Staff are very kind and make sure I am comfortable and have everything I need before they leave'. 'Staff are aware of the importance of privacy and dignity, they are polite'.

Two people who had used Somerset Care Community (Mendip) for several years told us they had tried other providers, but preferred to stay with Somerset Care Community (Mendip).

People told us their support plan accurately reflected the care and support that they received from staff. This was because they were fully involved in developing and agreeing to how their care and support was delivered.

People told us they preferred regular staff and they found the majority of the time, Somerset Care Community (Mendip) tried to provide consistent staff.

People told us they would speak to any of the staff if they had any concerns. People were confident that in doing so, any concerns would be dealt with promptly and effectively.