Background to this inspection
Updated
7 May 2016
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 29 February 2016. We gave 48 hours’ notice of the inspection because we needed to be sure that there would be someone in the office. The inspection was carried out by 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, 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 information we held about the service, including the previous inspection report and notifications they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us.
During the office visit, we spoke with the support coordinator and the registered manager. We spoke with five people who used the service when we visited them either at home or at a day centre. During the home visits, we also spoke with three shared lives carers. We spoke with one person who used the service, a relative and another shared lives carer by telephone. We looked at the care records for three people, and the recruitment, supervision and training records for the support coordinator and three carers. We reviewed information on how medicines and complaints were being managed, and how the provider assessed and monitored the quality of the service.
Updated
7 May 2016
We carried out an announced inspection on 29 February 2016. This is a shared lives service that recruits and monitors paid carers to provide support to adults with learning disabilities in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, seven people were being supported within five placements. The majority of the carers supported one person each, with only two of the five placements supporting two people each.
There was 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.
There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to the carers on how risks to people could be minimised. There were systems in place to safeguard people from risk of possible harm and suitable equipment was in place so that people were supported safely.
The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient carers to support people safely. Carers were regularly supported by the registered manager and they had been trained to meet people’s individual needs.
The carers understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care being provided. Where people did not have capacity to consent to their care, this was provided in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).
People were supported by caring, friendly and respectful carers. They lived with the carers as part of their family members and they benefitted greatly from this kind of service. People were supported to access other health and social care services when required.
People’s needs had been assessed, and care plans took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. They enjoyed happy and fulfilled lives because they had been given opportunities to pursue their hobbies and interests. They also enjoyed holidays of their choice, including going abroad.
The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people who used the service, the carers and people’s relatives. We found they acted on the comments received to improve the quality of the service.
The provider’s quality monitoring processes had been used effectively to drive continuous improvements. People and the carers we spoke with described the service as 'very good'.